Subject: Re: ath seems still buggy
To: Marcin Jessa <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Thor Lancelot Simon <email@example.com>
Date: 10/19/2005 12:49:06
On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 03:00:55PM +0000, Marcin Jessa wrote:
> I don't see any help coming from you in this rather pointless email
> exchange when all you seem to do is being rude.
Well, let me put it this way: you claimed that the ath driver is
"useless for any serious purpose". That's a categorical claim, and one
that I don't believe to be correct -- and, honestly, I believe that
focusing on such a claim would be highly counterproductive were one's
goal to identify specific problems with the device driver, and fix them.
I also believe that the claim is wrong. For some purposes, in some
configurations, the ath driver seems to work fine -- which is a pretty
strong indicator, to me, that we'd do better to distinguish the _specific_
configurations and conditions in which it doesn't work, and find the
root causes of the specific problems. In my experience, this is how
the overall reliability of complicated software systems is improved: by
finding and fixing one problem at a time, starting from a problem
description *that distinguishes the cases in which the problem occurs*
from cases in which it does not.
I don't think that claims that the sky is falling -- or that the atheros
driver is "useless for any serious purpose" -- help make the driver better.
I would like to refocus the discussion on specific positive and negative
cases of particular problems. I'm sorry if that's not helpful _to you_,
but I think it is in fact helpful overall.