On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 12:37:40AM +0000, Russell King wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 01:09:17AM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > How the actual patches get applied really isnt relevant. I know Linus
> > hated jitterbug, Im guessing he hates bugzilla too ?
>
> I'm waiting for the kernel bugzilla to become useful - currently the
> record for me has been:
>
> 3 bugs total
> 3 bugs for serial code for drivers I don't maintain, reassigned to mbligh.
That was unfortunate, and you got dumped with those because some thought
"Ah, serial! RMK!". Some of the categories in bugzilla still need
broadening IMO.
> This means I write (choose one):
> 1. non-buggy code (highly unlikely)
> 2. code no one tests
> 3. code people do test but report via other means (eg, email, irc)
>
> If it's (3), which it seems to be, it means that bugzilla is failing to
> do its job properly, which is most unfortunate.
It's early days. The types of bugs being filed still fall into the
"useful" "not useful" categories though. I don't think it's really
that important that we track what doesn't compile at this stage.
Those reports are being either closed within a few hours of them
being opened with a "Fixed in BK", or are drivers which no-one currently
wants to fix/can fix (Things like the various sti/cli breakage)
Dave
-- | Dave Jones. http://www.codemonkey.org.uk | SuSE Labs - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Dec 23 2002 - 22:00:23 EST