From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from wtarreau.pck.nerim.net ([62.212.114.60]:62429 "EHLO 1wt.eu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932594AbcHXNiz (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Aug 2016 09:38:55 -0400 Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 15:38:39 +0200 From: Willy Tarreau To: "Levin, Alexander" Cc: "stable@vger.kernel.org" , "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" , "jslaby@suse.cz" , "ben@decadent.org.uk" , "kamal@canonical.com" , "dchinner@redhat.com" Subject: Re: stable commit notes Message-ID: <20160824133839.GC22277@1wt.eu> References: <20160823175440.GA4182@sasha-lappy> <20160824063407.GA22178@1wt.eu> <20160824131526.GA7184@sasha-lappy> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160824131526.GA7184@sasha-lappy> Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 09:15:26AM -0400, Levin, Alexander wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 02:34:07AM -0400, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > Hi Sasha, > > > > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 01:54:40PM -0400, Levin, Alexander wrote: > > > I've decided to automate the bits I had for tracking stable mailing list > > > discussion and wrap it into the git notes interface to make it easy for > > > stable maintainers to track discussions related to stable commits. > > > > I actually think it's a good idea. I already use notes locally when I > > know I have to take care of certain commits, or when I want to mark that > > I already tested them. I don't know how practical this will be over the > > long term but it can definitely help. > > What's the concern about long term? My view is that if this will encourage > reviews in the long term. I'm not saying I have a concern, all I'm saying is that ideas which sound good initially have to prove good over time, that's all. You can ask Greg, the stable maintenance process has evolved quite a bit over the last 8 years (and that's for good). > > In fact I think that in the ideal case we would propagate fixes from most > > recent versions to oldest ones. This normally completely avoids all such > > issues. But the reality is different as the older kernels we're maintaining > > don't have the same release cycles so it's hard to expect that your 4.1 > > fetches from 4.4, then feeds your 3.18 which then feeds Ben's 3.16, then > > Greg's 3.14, then Jiri's 3.12, then my 3.10 etc... So the reality is that > > we're re-doing some part of the work on our respective sides and checking > > in other branches if we find anything relevant. Thus I pick from 3.14, and > > check for the equivalent 3.12 patches in my mbox to see if I notice any > > particular comment regarding the backport. That obviously doesn't mean it's > > riskless, just that the risk is reasonably low. At worst I'll pick a bug > > and its fix like I did this time without noticing it. > > Ideally, if the process is automated enough it could work this way. It also > means that we'll need just 1 maintainer rather than 5 :) Sure, and we are the ones causing the mess and making Greg's life harder sometimes. (...) > > > Updating is just a matter of fetching again. I'll make sure to push updates > > > on a daily basis. > > > > I'll definitely give it a try ASAP. If you can add a link to the > > discussion thread based on the message ID, it would be really cool! > > I can look into that. Right now I get the mails from my offlinemap dir, so > I'll need to figure out how to do that. Often it's a matter of matter of just appending the message ID you have in the Message-ID header (without the brackets) to certain MID services like mid.gmane.org (dead) or marc.info. For example : http://marc.info/?i=1471979939.13300.168.camel@decadent.org.uk Cheers, Willy