[Ksummit-2008-discuss] Current List of Kernel Summit suggested topics from the discuss list
jbarnes at virtuousgeek.org
Fri Jun 27 11:23:29 PDT 2008
On Friday, June 27, 2008 11:11 am H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Jesse Barnes wrote:
> > If we measure quality using bug metrics, things are pretty hard.
> One problem with any metric is that the metric becomes a driving factor
> in itself. Consider the whole whitespace issue, for example.
Sure, but I don't think that's a reason to avoid metrics altogether. We've
already seen that purely qualitative discussions don't really get us
anywhere. For any discussion about kernel quality I think we have to:
a) define our goals (no oopses? fast bug fix turnaround? whatever)
b) define a way to measure progress against those goals
c) periodically re-evaluate both
I think all of these are fairly difficult tasks, and any goal or metric we
create will have problems, but does that mean we should just ignore quality?
Or limit ourselves to our current situation where everyone has a different
idea of what it means and whether we're achieving it?
More information about the Ksummit-2008-discuss