Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] KS Topic request: Handling the Stable kernel, let's dump the cc: stable tag

Steven Rostedt
2013-07-15T21:07:25Z

On Mon, 2013-07-15 at 21:15 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:

> One thing I don't particularly like about this is having to resend the
> patches in response to mail; it seems cumbersome to do that rather than
> reply to mail or something. Requiring a positive acknowledgement or
> action seems useful but the particular one seems a bit annoying; I'd
> rather either just send the patch as part of the mark for stable
> workflow or ack something in mail.

A reply to the email before it goes in would work as well. I'm just
saying that the stable tag alone should not be the criteria of what goes
into stable.

>
> > Also, we could mandate that the maintainers do the backports too.
>
> That's what happens already isn't it?

Only if it breaks. But I've been quite impressed at a lot of the patches
that Greg seems to get working himself. He gets things backported that
don't look to be automated. I guess if it's trivial enough he does the
work himself. But I've had a few commits where I thought for sure I
would get a slew of "FAILED to apply" stable messages that ended up
going in without my help.

-- Steve