Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs

2007-11-14 Thread Neil Brown
On Tuesday November 13, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On Tuesday 13 November 2007 07:08, Mark Lord wrote:
  Ingo Molnar wrote:
  ..
 
   This is all QA-101 that _cannot be argued against on a rational basis_,
   it's just that these sorts of things have been largely ignored for
   years, in favor of the all-too-easy open source means many eyeballs and
   that is our QA answer, which is a _good_ answer but by far not the most
   intelligent answer! Today many eyeballs is simply not good enough and
   nature (and other OS projects) will route us around if we dont change.
 
  ..
 
  QA-101 and many eyeballs are not at all in opposition.
  The latter is how we find out about bugs on uncommon hardware,
  and the former is what we need to track them and overall quality.
 
  A HUGE problem I have with current efforts, is that once someone
  reports a bug, the onus seems to be 99% on the *reporter* to find
  the exact line of code or commit.  Ghad what a repressive method.
 
 This is the only method that scales.

That sounds overly hash, and the rest of you mail sounds much more
moderate and sensible - I can only assume you were using hyperbole??

Putting the onus on the reporter is simply not going to work unless
you have a business relationship.  In the community, we are all
volunteering our time (well, maybe my employer is volunteering my time
to do community support, but the effect is the same).

I would hope that the focus of developers is to empower bug reporters
to provide further information (and as has been said, git bisect is
a great empowerer).  Some people will be incredibly help, especially
if you ask politely and say thankyou.  Others won't for any of a
number of reasons - and maybe that means their bug won't get fixed.

To my eyes, the only method that scales is investing effort in
encouraging and training bug reporters.  Some of that effort might not
produce results, but when others among those you have encouraged start
answering the newbee questions on the list and save you the time, you
get a distinct feeling that it was all worth while.


I think we are in agreement - I just wanted to take issue with that
one sentence :-)  The rest is great.

NeilBrown

 
 Developer has only 24 hours in each day, and sometimes he needs to eat,
 sleep, and maybe even pay attention to e.g. his kids.
 
 But bug reporters are much more numerous and they have more
 hours in one day combined.
 
 BUT - it means that developers should try to increase user base,
 not scare users away.
 
  And if the developer who broke the damn thing, or who at least
  claims to be supporting that code, cannot reproduce the bug,
  they drop it completely.
 
 Developer should let reporter know that reporter needs to help
 a bit here. Sometimes a bit of hand holding is needed, but it
 pays off because you breed more qualified testers/bug reporters.
 
  Contrast that flawed approach with how Linus does things..
  he thinks through the symptoms, matches them to the code,
  and figures out what the few possibilities might be,
  and feeds back some trial balloon patches for the bug reporter to try.
 
  MUCH better.
 
  And remember, *I'm* an old-time Linux kernel developer.. just think about
  the people reporting bugs who haven't been around here since 1992..
 
 Yes. Developers should not grow more and more unhelpful
 and arrogant towards their users just because inexperienced
 users send incomplete/poorly written bug reports.
 They need to provide help, not humiliate/ignore.
 
 I think we agree here.
 --
 vda
 -
 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/


Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs

2007-11-14 Thread Neil Brown
On Wednesday November 14, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 09:38:20AM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
  On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:08:47 +0100 Ingo Molnar wrote:
   so please stop this too busy and too noisy nonsense already. It was 
   nonsense 10 years ago and it's nonsense today. In 10 years the kernel 
   grew from a 1 million lines codebase to an 8 million lines codebase, so 
   what? Deal with it and be intelligent about filtering your information 
   influx instead of imposing a hard pre-filtering criteria that restricts 
   intelligent processing of information.
  
  So you have a preferred method of handling email.  Please don't
  force it on the rest of us.
 
 I'd be curious for any pointers on tools, actually.  I read (ok, skim)
 lkml but still overlook relevant bug reports occasionally.
 (Fortunately, between Trond and Andrew and others forwarding things it's
 not actually a problem, but I'm still curious).

Virtual Folders.

I use VM mode in EMACS, but I believe some other mail readers have the
same functionality.
I have a virtual folder called nfs which shows me all mail in my
inbox which has the string 'nfs' or 'lockd' in a To, Cc, or Subject
field.  When I visit that folder, I see all mail about nfs, whether it
was sent to me personally, or to a relevant list, or to lkml.

Admittedly if someone doesn't bother to choose a meaningful Subject,
then I might miss that.  I think this mostly happens when Andrew sends
a -mm announcement, asked people to change the subject line when
following up, and someone follows up without changing the subject line
and say NFS doesn't work any more.

I have another virtual folder which matches md and raid and
mdadm in any header (so when the people from coraid.com talk about
ATA over Ethernet, that gets badly filed, but it is a small cost).

Then I have the bkernel (boring kernel) folder for all mail from
lkml that doesn't mention nfs or raid or md, and isn't from or to
me.  That folder I skim every week or so and just read the juicy
debates and look for interesting tidbits from interesting people -
then delete the whole folder, mostly unread.

I don't think I could cope with mail without virtual folders.

NeilBrown