On Mon, 13 Mar 2000, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 02:45:44PM +0000, James Sutherland wrote:
> > OK, your code handled a load of basic file operations on one machine. This
> > does NOT justify considering it read for inclusion. Follow the suggestion
> > above: Audit the interface between your code and the rest of the kernel
> > (i.e. the VFS interface). THEN, once you have done this in detail and
> > documented it, try again.
>
> I think you are a bit unfair now. Code does not have to be perfect
> to be incorporated into the linux-kernel, just good enough (on the
> assumption that the remaining bugs will be slashed much faster once that
> happened). reiserfs seems to be in a state for that, assuming it is marked
> as experimental. The 2.2 version runs on a lot of production systems.
> It is certainly in a much better shape than a lot of code that got into
> the kernel in the past.
The trouble is, the previous message said "test x - it's broken" - to
which the reply was "I have tested a and b, and they work". So what? Fix
the broken bit, rather than testing the working bits again!
> "done this in detail and documented it" shows that you didn't do much
> linux kernel work BTW ;)
Documenting it is a bit optimistic, I admit - but FIXING the problem would
be nice :)
James.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Mar 15 2000 - 21:00:25 EST