On Fri, 2015-05-22 at 14:07 +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > I'd expect that holding off on the initial report for a while (at least > a week but I'd guess longer) would probably avoid a lot of noise.
I have data on roughly a year worth of linux-next and mainline releases. I might try to see if I can extract from it things like: - how often this (ie, pre merged drivers) happens; - how long it takes for those issue to disappear; and - what made these issue disappear (that might be hard, because it probably requires cross checking my (incomplete) mail archive.) This will take quite some time, I'm afraid. Provided it actually works, that is. > Doing > it immediately is likely to generate lots of false positives simply > because coordinating down to a single day is a lot of effort. False positives is a bit ambiguous here. I don't think we often, if ever, sent out notifications that were flat out wrong. But yes, some issues can be expected to get resolved given a bit of time. The hard part is knowing beforehand which issues will be resolved quickly and which won't. Thanks, Paul Bolle -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
