Re: Tracking regressions for next release(s)

[Bjorn Helgaas]

On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 12:01 AM, Maciej Rutecki
<maciej.rutecki@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi
>
> For a long time (dealing with colleagues) we tracking regressions in
> stable RC versions of the kernel. Because 3.3 is out, and it is time
> thinking about tracking regressions for
> next release. I believe that we need to do some summary and decide on
> further action.
>
> I am interested in the opinion of the developers, testers, and
> everyone involved in the development of the kernel, if they thing that
> tracking regressions and monitoring the quality makes sense,
> especially since I met several times (put it mildly) dislike of such
> work and the bugs are repaired relatively slowly. Perhaps someone has
> comments or proposals for change (in the way of work or me).

I personally find the regression tracking very valuable.  Regressions
are worse than other bugs because they make users (at least this one
:)) hesitant to move to newer kernels, and then we miss out on the
testing we depend on.

Your tracking work helps everybody pay attention to these issues.  I
don't understand opposition to it.

Bjorn
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/