[BUG] New Kernel Bugs

[Ingo Molnar]

* Randy Dunlap <rdunlap at xenotime.net> wrote:

> > (and this is in no way directed at the networking folks - it holds 
> > for all of us. I have one main complaint about networking: the 
> > separate netdev list is a bad idea - networking regressions should 
> > be discussed and fixed on lkml, like most other subsystems are. Any 
> > artificial split of the lk discussion space is bad.)
> 
> but here I disagree.  LKML is already too busy and noisy. Major 
> subsystems need their own discussion areas.

That's a stupid argument. We lose much more by forced isolation of 
discussion than what we win by having less traffic! It's _MUCH_ easier 
to narrow down information (by filter by threads, by topics, by people, 
etc.) than it is to gobble information together from various fractured 
sources. We learned it _again and again_ that isolation of kernel 
discussions causes bad things.

In fact this thread is the very example: David points out that on netdev 
some of those bugs were already discussed and resolved. Had it been all 
on lkml we'd all be aware of it.

this is a single kernel project that is released together as one 
codebase, so a central place of discussion is obvious and common-sense.

so please stop this "too busy and too noisy" nonsense already. It was 
nonsense 10 years ago and it's nonsense today. In 10 years the kernel 
grew from a 1 million lines codebase to an 8 million lines codebase, so 
what? Deal with it and be intelligent about filtering your information 
influx instead of imposing a hard pre-filtering criteria that restricts 
intelligent processing of information.

	Ingo