From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262709AbVG2TSU (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Jul 2005 15:18:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262707AbVG2TQO (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Jul 2005 15:16:14 -0400 Received: from mail.kroah.org ([69.55.234.183]:31918 "EHLO perch.kroah.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262699AbVG2TPC (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Jul 2005 15:15:02 -0400 Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 12:14:34 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: [patch 05/29] Add the rules about the -stable kernel releases to the Documentation directory Message-ID: <20050729191434.GG5095@kroah.com> References: <20050729184950.014589000@press.kroah.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050729191255.GA5095@kroah.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org This was the last agreed upon set of rules, it's probably time we actually add them to the kernel tree to make them "official". Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt | 58 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 files changed, 58 insertions(+) --- /dev/null 1970-01-01 00:00:00.000000000 +0000 +++ gregkh-2.6/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt 2005-07-29 11:34:01.000000000 -0700 @@ -0,0 +1,58 @@ +Everything you ever wanted to know about Linux 2.6 -stable releases. + +Rules on what kind of patches are accepted, and what ones are not, into +the "-stable" tree: + + - It must be obviously correct and tested. + - It can not bigger than 100 lines, with context. + - It must fix only one thing. + - It must fix a real bug that bothers people (not a, "This could be a + problem..." type thing.) + - It must fix a problem that causes a build error (but not for things + marked CONFIG_BROKEN), an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real + security issue, or some "oh, that's not good" issue. In short, + something critical. + - No "theoretical race condition" issues, unless an explanation of how + the race can be exploited. + - It can not contain any "trivial" fixes in it (spelling changes, + whitespace cleanups, etc.) + - It must be accepted by the relevant subsystem maintainer. + - It must follow Documentation/SubmittingPatches rules. + + +Procedure for submitting patches to the -stable tree: + + - Send the patch, after verifying that it follows the above rules, to + stable@kernel.org. + - The sender will receive an ack when the patch has been accepted into + the queue, or a nak if the patch is rejected. This response might + take a few days, according to the developer's schedules. + - If accepted, the patch will be added to the -stable queue, for review + by other developers. + - Security patches should not be sent to this alias, but instead to the + documented security@kernel.org. + + +Review cycle: + + - When the -stable maintainers decide for a review cycle, the patches + will be sent to the review committee, and the maintainer of the + affected area of the patch (unless the submitter is the maintainer of + the area) and CC: to the linux-kernel mailing list. + - The review committee has 48 hours in which to ack or nak the patch. + - If the patch is rejected by a member of the committee, or linux-kernel + members object to the patch, bringing up issues that the maintainers + and members did not realize, the patch will be dropped from the + queue. + - At the end of the review cycle, the acked patches will be added to + the latest -stable release, and a new -stable release will happen. + - Security patches will be accepted into the -stable tree directly from + the security kernel team, and not go through the normal review cycle. + Contact the kernel security team for more details on this procedure. + + +Review committe: + + - This will be made up of a number of kernel developers who have + volunteered for this task, and a few that haven't. + --