[Ksummit-2009-discuss] Meeting userspace requirements

[Ingo Molnar]

* James Bottomley <James.Bottomley at HansenPartnership.com> wrote:

> > There's a fair amount of noise on lkml indeed, but i have the 
> > opposite experience from you in the fields i'm interested in: 
> > specialistic lists often tend to produce annoyingly inbred, almost 
> > clan mentality driven code. Code from such lists often emerges in a 
> > too advanced state to really allow the resolution of design problems 
> > amicably once it hits a broader audience such as lkml.
> > 
> > lkml might be a busy and noisy place, but it is also refreshingly 
> > diverse. I find that the time i put into lkml is spent well, and the 
> > results (both for projects i input into lkml and projects i see on 
> > lkml) tend to be a lot broader and more reliable in the end than 
> > some of the stuff that comes from specialistic lists.
> > 
> > and the thing is, the most difficult technical problems in Linux 
> > tend to be cross-discipline - so them touching a generic list like 
> > lkml is an obvious bonus. Noise is a problem but can also be 
> > filtered out - on the other hand the lack of cohesion and the lack 
> > of a broader picture can cause irreversible loss.
> 
> Well, we can debate the theory of following LKML vs subject matter
> lists, [...]

That's not what i did though - i primarily expressed my opposite 
personal experience to yours, related to the topics i am active in. 
Those are pretty orthogonal to the topics you are active in, which 
kind of explains the different personal experience.

	Ingo