Mary Gardiner wrote:
> Well I think Linux kernel is declared stable when there are no
> *showstoppers* - I don't know about no *bugs*. But I'm sure there are
> people on this list who follow linux development a bit more closely than I
> do (says she running kernel 2.2.14).
I don't know how Linux-kernel development works. I do know that Telsa's
diary mentions experience with open 'bugs' which are multiply-reported
.. as in, tens or hundreds of reports of the same bug. And I, at least,
only care that these are fixed once.. I don't need the same bug fixed a
hundred times. :)
That's a fault in the bug-tracking process, rather than the testing or
bug-fixing one.
I don't know if the kernel is released known-buggy or not.
> I know games tend to be buggy on release, but this can be ascribed to a
> hardware thing - they can't do extensive QA on hundreds of thousands of
> different hardware configurations.
Game companies aren't sane entities .. or rather, they're well aware
that their audience will put up with buggy software.
Jenn V.
--
"Do you ever wonder if there's a whole section of geek culture
you miss out on by being a geek?" - Dancer.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Jenn Vesperman
http://www.simegen.com/~jenn/
_______________________________________________
techtalk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
