Re: [alsa-devel] [BUG] New Kernel Bugs

2007-11-15 Thread Jörn Engel
On Thu, 15 November 2007 13:26:51 +0100, Rene Herman wrote:
 
 Can you please just shelve this crap? You have a way of knowing that ALSA 
 will accept you and that is knowing or assuming that the ALSA project 
 doesn't consist of drooling retards.

Well, my experience with moderation has been that moderated mails are
stuck in some queue for weeks.  Two seperate lists, neither of them was
alsa.  If also is doing a better job, great.  But it still has to live
with the general reputation of non-subscriber moderation.

 When a project list goes to the difficulty of moderating non-subscribers it 
 has made the explicit choice to _not_ become subscriber only. Then refusing 
 valid non-subscribers after all makes no sense whatsoever. I'm sorry you 
 got your feelings hurt by that other list but it was no doubt an accident; 
 take it up with them.

Been there, done that.  In spite of people not being drooling retards,
the amount of time and effort they invest into either moderation or
improving the ruleset is quite limited.  Problems persist.

And even without mails being held hostage for weeks, every single
moderation mail is annoying.  Like the one I'm sure to receive after
sending this out.

Jörn

-- 
Joern's library part 5:
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/compression-faq/part2/section-9.html


Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs

2007-11-13 Thread Jörn Engel
On Tue, 13 November 2007 15:18:07 -0500, Mark Lord wrote:
 
 I just find it weird that something can be known broken for several -rc*
 kernels before I happen to install it, discover it's broken on my own 
 machine,
 and then I track it down, fix it, and submit the patch, generally all 
 within a
 couple of hours.  Where the heck was the dude(ess) that broke it ??  AWOL.
 
 And when I receive hostility from the maintainers of said code for fixing
 their bugs, well.. that really motivates me to continue reporting new ones..

Given a decent bug report, I agree that having the bug not looked at is
shameful.  But what can a developer do if a bug report effectively reads
there is some bug somewhere in recent kernels?  How can I know that in
this particular case it is my bug that I introduced?  It could just as
easily be 50 other people and none of them are eager to debug it unless
they suspect it to be their bug.

This is a common problem and fairly unrelated to linux in general or the
kernel in particular.  Who is going to be the sucker that figures out
which developer the bug belongs to?  And I have yet to find a project,
commercial or opensource, where volunteers flock to become such a
sucker.

One option is to push this role to the bug reporter.  Another is to
strong-arm some developers into this role, by whatever means.  A third
would be for $LARGE_COMPANY to hire some people.  If you have a better
idea or would volunteer your time, I'd be grateful.  Simply blaming one
side, whether bug reporter or a random developer, for not being the
sucker doesn't help anyone.

Jörn

-- 
Joern's library part 2:
http://www.art.net/~hopkins/Don/unix-haters/tirix/embarrassing-memo.html


Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs

2007-11-13 Thread Jörn Engel
On Tue, 13 November 2007 13:56:58 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
 
 It's relatively common that a regression in subsystem A will manifest as a
 failure in subsystem B, and the report initially lands on the desk of the
 subsystem B developers.
 
 But that's OK.  The subsystem B people are the ones with the expertise to
 be able to work out where the bug resides and to help the subsystem A
 people understand what went wrong.
 
 Alas, sometimes the B people will just roll eyes and do nothing because
 they know the problem wasn't in their code.  Sometimes.

And sometimes the A people will ignore the B people after the root cause
has been worked out.  Do you have a good idea how to shame A into
action?  Should I put you on Cc:?  Right now I'm in the eye-rolling
phase.

Jörn

-- 
The cost of changing business rules is much more expensive for software
than for a secretaty.
-- unknown