Re: Definitions

From: Gerhard Mack (gmack@innerfire.net)
Date: Wed Aug 09 2000 - 15:12:19 EDT

Next message: Roger Gammans: "Re: IDE Tape problem in 2.2.16 (bug?)"

Previous message: Alan Cox: "Re: Definitions"
In reply to: Michael W Zappe: "Re: Definitions"
Next in thread: Michael Rothwell: "RE: Definitions"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Wed, 9 Aug 2000, Michael W Zappe wrote:

> Now that my message has gained legitamacy through word wrapping, since people's
> email clients don't seem to be able to flow text, could I get an answer to my
> questions? God, I didn't think that my mailer was that 31337.
>
> Do you get the impression also that getting any real questions addressed is a
> bit difficult? ;-) (Still no real response to my original *polite*
> inquiry...) (<-- look Alan, no caps!)
>
> My question still remains: What is a feature, and what is a bug fix? And
> what
> are the real criteria for making it into the kernel? "Technical merit" is not
> an acceptable answer. On "technical merit" Linux makes a horrible can opener.
>
Bug fix: Code that fixes an error.

Feature: Adds new functionality, or improves efficiency

-- Gerhard Mack

gmack@innerfire.net

<>< As a computer I find your faith in technology amusing.

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Roger Gammans: "Re: IDE Tape problem in 2.2.16 (bug?)"
Previous message: Alan Cox: "Re: Definitions"
In reply to: Michael W Zappe: "Re: Definitions"
Next in thread: Michael Rothwell: "RE: Definitions"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Aug 09 2000 - 15:16:55 EDT