On 2 December 2014 at 13:05, Chris Murphy <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
-- On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 6:17 PM, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 1) A problem is identified.
> 2) Profile the problem and show where it might be happening.
> 3) Some amount on fixing the problem is done.
> 4) Find that the problem isn't there and there is no quick fix.
> 5) Throw away that solution and implement another one.
> 6) Deal with flame wars about any and all changes during this from people
> the problem doesn't occur to.
>
> Projects which use words like "we" before 3 or 4 usually never get to 3 or 4
> due to the amount of "why is your problem now my work?" response from
> everyone from developers to random people on the lists.
>
> Currently you are at 1, and you have tried to jump to 3 with the Arch
> solution. You need to profile the Arch solution to see if it really works or
> if it only works if you run an X11/twm and nothing fancier than Mosaic from
> 1997. [Or without X11 at all.. that is the usual way to get a large power
> improvement on a laptop.]
Question: Shouldn't the evaluation and fix be targeted at Rawhide
first, and then see about "backporting" demonstrated fixes to Fedora
It should always be in rawhide. I doubt that it would be ready anytime near Fedora 22 or 23.
Stephen J Smoogen.
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
