begin quoting David Brown as of Wed, Dec 05, 2007 at 04:43:20PM -0800: > On Wed, Dec 05, 2007 at 02:05:13AM -0800, SJS wrote: > > >3.6 million lines of code without much to show for it is a pretty good > >example of wheel-spinning; it would be better if those 3.6 million lines > >of code fixed 300,000 bugs, say. > > I'm not sure what to say. Have you read any of the kernel changelogs? > These aren't 3.6 million lines of whitespace changes. Just because they > haven't checked bugs off in a bug-tracker doesn't mean they don't fix them.
No, and I won't. You floated a big number as an example of "not wheel-spinning", and alone, that isn't sufficient. Or even a good indicator, much less a refutation of wheel-spinning. It's not my job as a reader to shore up your arguments for you. > I find this amusing, since I have attended several sessions where the linux > kernel development model was used as an example of how distributed > development can work well. "Attending sessions" is also a non-compelling argument. Quite the opposite in fact. It's so weak so as to be an argument against. (Not that I'm not arguing that the linux development model works or doesn't work -- I'm just reacting poorly to the refutation of wheel spinning, and now, the idea that lots of people saying something would somehow make it true.) > It's not to say that a bug tracking system > couldn't help, but there aren't any that fit the kernel development model. Andrew nailed it, I think -- the lieutenants keep track of their bugs, and Linus is only dealing with debugged code integration. The bug tracking is still there, it's just hidden under one layer of management. > Trying to force it into a very different model wouldn't solve any problems, > it would just make things worse, probably much worse. Yah, everyone would see the huge bug list, and go away. :-P -- The Emperor Has No Clothes. Stewart Stremler -- KPLUG-List@kernel-panic.org http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
