> On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 09:09:52 EST, Alexander Viro said:
>
> > Proposal is a bit naive, though - in most of the cases fuckups merrily
> > pass original testing.
>
>
> We're not going to create a testing procedure that will find all bugs,
> since that's essentially impossible. On the other hand, I think we
> all need to collectively take 24 or 48 hour off, spend the time downing
> several <insert beverage here>, and see if anybody has a good proposal
> that would catch 90% of the show-stopper bugs that have slipped through
> so far in the 2.4 and 2.5 series, without complicating matters TOO much.
>
> Here's a simple one: a -rcN release has to sit there at least 96
> hours before it gets tagged as "final". That's something we've been
> quite poor at so far:
Well, let's see. I can't speak for other folks, but the worst of mine
during 2.4 was in 2.4.15-pre9. The rest was minor and IIRC didn't make
it into -final. That one did, however. It wasn't caught until 2.4.15 -
not immediately, at that.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/