On Nov 13, 2007 3:08 PM, Mark Lord <liml@xxxxxx> wrote: > > Ingo Molnar wrote: > .. > > This is all QA-101 that _cannot be argued against on a rational basis_, > > it's just that these sorts of things have been largely ignored for > > years, in favor of the all-too-easy "open source means many eyeballs and > > that is our QA" answer, which is a _good_ answer but by far not the most > > intelligent answer! Today "many eyeballs" is simply not good enough and > > nature (and other OS projects) will route us around if we dont change. > .. > > QA-101 and "many eyeballs" are not at all in opposition. > The latter is how we find out about bugs on uncommon hardware, > and the former is what we need to track them and overall quality. > > A HUGE problem I have with current "efforts", is that once someone > reports a bug, the onus seems to be 99% on the *reporter* to find > the exact line of code or commit. Ghad what a repressive method. > Btw, I used to test every -mm kernel. But since I've switched distros (gentoo->ubuntu) and I have less time, I feel it's harder to test -rc or -mm kernels (I know this isn't a lkml problem but more a distro problem, but I would love having an ubuntu blessed repo with current dev kernel for the latest stable ubuntu release). For debugging, maybe it's time someone does an amazon ec2+s3 service to automate the bisecting and create .deb/.rpm from git, I don't know how much it would cost though. regards, Benoit _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
