Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] Issues with stable process

["Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>]

On Monday, July 13, 2015 08:28:18 PM Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Jul 2015 21:02:26 -0400
> Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
> 
> > Yes, it's great if we can catch things in -next. But I don't believe
> > that patches that fix bugs found in Linus's tree should sit in next
> > before going into Linus's tree, because those patches are basically
> > fixing stuff that was already in next and wasn't discovered until it
> > hit Linus's tree. Which is why I say it's a waste of time to put it in
> > next before sending straight to Linus.
> 
> That, of course, assumes that these fixes don't introduce *other* bugs
> that might just be caught in -next...
> 
> In general, though, I think a lot of people see -next as -rc1 without the
> quality control; it's volatile and scary.  So it's not surprising that it
> doesn't get a lot of real-world testing.  And, as long as that's the case,
> there's going to be a lot of bugs that are never caught in -next.

Well stated.

And in addition to that, -next is simply evolving too fast to get any deeper
testing at any point.

Thanks,
Rafael