Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] The amount of -stable emails

[Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>]

On Tue, Aug 05, 2025 at 01:33:39PM -0400, James Bottomley wrote:
>On Tue, 2025-08-05 at 13:26 -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 05, 2025 at 12:49:02PM -0400, James Bottomley wrote:
>[...]
>> > Actually, if stable emails just had a header tag, it would be easy
>> > for procmail to sort them out ... which is what I've been asking
>> > for for years.  X-Stable-Base: and X-Stable: seem to be reasonably
>> > common and catch most of it, but codifying the use in the kernel
>> > documentation and using them consistently would really help.
>>
>> Do we have any stable-related mails that don't have an X-Stable:
>> header?
>
>It seems to be mostly working for now, but what I often find is the
>header changes on a whim and the filter stops working.  And, since
>nothing is written down, we all have to guess again what it means.  If
>you're confident this one's not going to change, why not document it
>and commit to using it in the stable process docs?

It will probably need to be bigger than that: we'd need to document the
overall expectations and process before we document some of the nits in
it.

-- 
Thanks,
Sasha