FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-10-2008, 05:03 AM
Thorsten Leemhuis
 
Default regressions (was: Linux is not about choice )

On 10.01.2008 05:59, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Thorsten Leemhuis (fedora@leemhuis.info) said:
>>> Right now DRI/DRM breaks VT switch and suspend on my laptop. Should we
>>> ship two Intel drivers and two kernels until this is resolved? [...]
>> Bugs in a updated package are something totally different (everyone
>> tries to avoid them, but they happen, so we have to live with them) then
>> switching to a new completely firewire stack that doesn't support
>> everything yet what the old stack did.
> By this logic, we should have enabled both old IDE and libata and
> let the users choose between them at runtime as well.

Not sure about this one -- Alan afaics did a lot of work to make sure
everything crucial worked with the new libata PATA driver on those
systems I used. Sure, there were bugs, but there are bug in every
software and Alan tried its best to fix them quickly.

But yeah, maybe enabling both old IDE and libata (with defaulting to
libata) for one release might have made sense. At least it made for
OpenSuse, as that's what they did afaik. Sure, it's more work for one
release, but if that is needed to support all systems that were
supported earlier then it might be worth the trouble.

> The way to have a reliable core system is to pick a single supported
> interface and fix it.

Totally agreed in general. But sometimes it's not easily possible when
switching from foo to bar (be it the old firewire stack and juju or IDE
and libata).

> As far as I can tell, the firewire stack now
> works, except for an issue with one hardware chipset.

Now: seems so afaics. But when it was new it was a regression for quite
a bunch of people. That's bad and we should avoid regressions as much as
possible. Just like the kernel developers do -- Torvalds on lkml yells
loudly if there is a regression. He sometimes even reverts patches that
made the situation better for a lot of people if it is a regression for
a quite small group of existing users. I think we need similar rules, as
people will otherwise turn away from Fedora to something that just works
for them; otherwise everyone will continue to say "Fedora is a Beta for
RHEL" is we don#t take our userbase serious.

CU
knurd

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-10-2008, 11:15 AM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default regressions (was: Linux is not about choice )

Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora <at> leemhuis.info> writes:
> Now: seems so afaics. But when it was new it was a regression for quite
> a bunch of people. That's bad and we should avoid regressions as much as
> possible. Just like the kernel developers do -- Torvalds on lkml yells

While I agree regressions are annoying, and thus perceived as a very bad thing,
in practice regressions are less of a problem than unfixed bugs: if there's a
regression, you can rollback to a working package, if there are unfixed bugs,
you have nothing to upgrade or downgrade to.

Kevin Kofler

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-10-2008, 11:31 AM
Adam Tkac
 
Default regressions (was: Linux is not about choice )

On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 12:15:37PM +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora <at> leemhuis.info> writes:
> > Now: seems so afaics. But when it was new it was a regression for quite
> > a bunch of people. That's bad and we should avoid regressions as much as
> > possible. Just like the kernel developers do -- Torvalds on lkml yells
>
> While I agree regressions are annoying, and thus perceived as a very bad thing,
> in practice regressions are less of a problem than unfixed bugs: if there's a
> regression, you can rollback to a working package, if there are unfixed bugs,
> you have nothing to upgrade or downgrade to.
>
> Kevin Kofler

I don't think so. If there's unfixed bug it means that things don't
work, didn't work and won't work for some time. But regression means
that thing worked but don't work now. At least for me bugs doesn't
matter me. Regression yes. I remember Linus speach that if We fix all
regressions and some bugs programs become better. If We neglect
regressions it's impossible complain if software is better or worse,
people will be annoyed. You were accustomed and you have to switch
your habbits - it's pretty harder that you want start using something
new and you can't so you will find other solution which works for you.
We really should be focused primarily on regressions, not for "common"
bugs.

Adam

--
Adam Tkac, Red Hat, Inc.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 06:52 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org