On Thu, 01 May 2008 13:42:44 +0100
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org> wrote:

quoted text
> On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 07:15 -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > Maybe that's a "boggle" for you; but for me that's symptomatic of
> > where we are today: We don't make (effective) prioritization
> > decisions. Such decisions are hard, because it effectively means
> > telling people "I'm sorry but your bug is not yet important". 
> 
> It's not that clear-cut, either. Something which manifests itself as a
> build failure or an immediate test failure on m68k alone, might
> actually turn out to cause subtle data corruption on other platforms.
> 
> You can't always know that it isn't important, just because it only
> shows up in some esoteric circumstances. You only really know how
> important it was _after_ you've fixed it.
> 
> That obviously doesn't help us to prioritise.

absolutely. I'm not going to argue that prioritization is easy. Or 
that we'll be able to get it right all the time.
Doesn't mean we shouldn't try at least somewhat..

quoted text
> 
--
unsubscribe notice
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/