Re: ALSA: nm256: Fine-tuning for three function implementations

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> Because I didn't see any test result from you,

This is correct so far.


> so I can't trust you.

This view did not hinder you to integrate some of my update suggestions
which you found easier to handle.


>> Which test configurations would you trust finally?
> 
> Do test whatever like the users do.

I find such an information too unsafe for an official acceptance test.


>> How can such descriptions improve the trust situation?
> 
> It's the first step.  At least then I can see you did some test.
> Currently nothing.  zero.  nada.

I am unsure if acceptable test results will ever be published for this
software module.


> How can I trust it?

* Would you dare to inspect the shown source code adjustments again?

* How do you think about to sort the remaining update candidates
  by their change size (or software age)?

Regards,
Markus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Development]     [Kernel Announce]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux Networking Development]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux