On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 23:24:14 +0100 Jörn Engel <joern@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 13 November 2007 13:56:58 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > It's relatively common that a regression in subsystem A will manifest as a > > failure in subsystem B, and the report initially lands on the desk of the > > subsystem B developers. > > > > But that's OK. The subsystem B people are the ones with the expertise to > > be able to work out where the bug resides and to help the subsystem A > > people understand what went wrong. > > > > Alas, sometimes the B people will just roll eyes and do nothing because > > they know the problem wasn't in their code. Sometimes. > > And sometimes the A people will ignore the B people after the root cause > has been worked out. Do you have a good idea how to shame A into > action? Should I put you on Cc:? Right now I'm in the eye-rolling > phase. > Well, that's the problem, isn't it? The best I can come up with is to suggest that all the info be captured in a bugzilla report so that at least it doesn't get forgotten about. I suppose that other options are a) try to fix it yourself. I'll take the patch and as long as we make a big enough mess of it, someone who knows what they're doing might fix it for real. b) If it was a regression, identify the offending commit and we'll just revert it. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
