Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] [3/4] Elevate handling of regressions that made it to releases deemed for end users

Mark Brown
2024-06-20T14:16:29Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 971 bytes --]

On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 03:35:05PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 20.06.24 15:20, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > On Tue, 18 Jun 2024, Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@leemhuis.info> wrote:

> >> What wording can avoid this? "By the end of the (current/next) week"
> >> maybe? In business context that afaik usually mean Fridays, but I'm not
> >> a native speaker, so might be wrong there.

> > Perhaps try wording it in terms of -rc/release instead of calendar?

> Not totally against that, but the thing is: in a earlier local draft it
> used to be like that. And then I noticed that this will add another week
> when it comes to the merge window.

I don't think rules lawyering the specific wording is going to make an
enormous difference here, people are going to try to do something
sensible anyway and the merge window is just different to the normal
flow. You need something that's a suitable combination of
comprehensible and not looking like unreasonable micromanagement.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]