From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Joe Perches Subject: Re: [PATCH] stable_kernel_rules.txt: Exclude networking from stable rules Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 13:34:05 -0700 Message-ID: <1379968445.3575.60.camel@joe-AO722> References: <20130919.135628.1201613770803318193.davem@davemloft.net> <1379615474.22168.13.camel@joe-AO722> <20130922185104.GA7515@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, LKML , xfs@oss.sgi.com, stephen@networkplumber.org, Mikulas Patocka , Rob Landley , Greg Kroah-Hartman , David Miller To: Christoph Hellwig Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20130922185104.GA7515@infradead.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Sun, 2013-09-22 at 11:51 -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > This is also the preferred way to do it for XFS. Maybe word it in a way > that we can easily add subsystems. > > To me it generally seems to be the best way to do it - having random Ccs > and lots of stable trees doesn't seem like a very good way of handling > it. Maybe adding a mechanism to MAINTAINERS would be better. Maybe a default B: (backport?) of stable@vger.kernel.org with a per-subsystem override? SUBSYSTEM TYPE M: maintainer@email.address L: list@email.address S: Supported F: file/pattern/ B: stable@email.address _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs