Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:47:00 -0400 | From | Dan Noe <> | Subject | Re: Slow DOWN, please!!! |
| |
On 4/30/2008 16:31, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Wed, 30 Apr 2008, Andrew Morton wrote: >> <jumps up and down> >> >> There should be nothing in 2.6.x-rc1 which wasn't in 2.6.x-mm1! > > The problem I see with both -mm and linux-next is that they tend to be > better at finding the "physical conflict" kind of issues (ie the merge > itself fails) than the "code looks ok but doesn't actually work" kind of > issue. > > Why? > > The tester base is simply too small. > > Now, if *that* could be improved, that would be wonderful, but I'm not > seeing it as very likely.
Perhaps we should be clear and simple about what potential testers should be running at any given point in time. With -mm, linux-next, linux-2.6, etc, as a newcomer I find it difficult to know where my testing time and energy is best directed.
Is linux-next the right thing to be running at this point? Is there a need for testing in a particular tree (netdev, x86, etc)?
Cheers, Dan
-- /--------------- - - - - - - | Dan Noe | http://isomerica.net/~dpn/
| |