Quick heads-up: Ubuntu memory leak issue
07721 at ipam.pt
Wed Apr 28 00:03:09 UTC 2010
Good approach. If you allow me a quote:
"Before all else, be armed" - Nicollo Machiavelli
On Tue, 2010-04-27 at 15:49 -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam at redhat.com> wrote:
> > I'm not sure if it's worth that; so far I haven't seen any story which
> > actually comes out and claims the bug is in Fedora. I just wanted to
> > provide an explanation in case it comes up. There was one comment on a
> > fairly obscure news article -
> > http://techie-buzz.com/foss/ubuntu-10-04-lucid-lynx-hit-by-major-memory-leak-problem.html - which claimed Fedora was affected, but that's all.
> Blame me for that obscure blog.
> Hopeful this all blows over and the notoriety that the Ubuntu big has
> gotten in the last few days doesn't morph into some sort of "common
> knowledge" that Red Hat/Fedora has this bug and Ubuntu ended up
> catching it and we didn't. The wording of the launchpad ticket leaves
> a lot of room to make poor judgements about the pedigree of this
> particular patchset. As evidenced in the comments of that blog
> phoronix I think is the oldest article I can find from April 21st and
> I think other blogs have picked it up from there and are
> rebroadcacsting it . Blogs being what they are, I really don't want
> to see the poor choice of wording in the Launchpad ticket get
> mischaracterized in an effort to sensationalize a story and drive blog
> readership at the expense of... reality.
> And In case this ends up infesting back channel communications like
> blog comment areas, twitter or irc...any place where crowdsourced
> misinformation breeds and propagates... I do not want comments like
> the one in that blog to be repeated without having a rebuttal a quick
> google search away. Does it need to be a press release? No. It's not
> really appropriate to rub Debian or Ubuntu's noses in picking up an
> intermediate patchset and running with it. But having an easily
> searchable wiki page at hand for reference would be something nice to
> have...just in case I need to politely educate someone who chooses to
> make statements not supported by fact.
> But I do like the QA story about how our testing repository worked to
> help iterate a solution inside our new pre-release branching workflow.
> That's a nice positive story. If we can tell it without referencing
> the problems others have had in this area, I think that would be a
> good positive affirmation for our QA team and the new workflow
> introduced in F13.
Evil Clown (http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/evilclown.htm)
More information about the marketing