well, at least there's a very simple way to get
valuable information : install a voting system on a
web site (kernel.org...) so that people who go there
to get a new kernel can also tell which kernel
they're using, the approximative uptime they have,
if they encountered problems, if they had to
patch it to gain stability, and eventually what they
do with it (io/net/desktop/all).
A further step could be to qualify recensed patches
on the net in the same manner. There *are* ways to
get very stable kernels even now, for a given
application. Not everyone has the same needs of
course, but it could help even the maintainers by
giving them a more global feedback about which
patches could most likely be included with low risk.
I think that if even one tenth of the LKML
subscribers rank their kernels at least once a week,
we'll quickly see some stable and unusable kernels.
Just my 2 cents,
Willy
___________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en français !
Yahoo! Courrier : http://courrier.yahoo.fr
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/