From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F8774C6 for ; Fri, 2 May 2014 20:51:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from e36.co.us.ibm.com (e36.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.154]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 90CB41FB59 for ; Fri, 2 May 2014 20:51:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from /spool/local by e36.co.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Fri, 2 May 2014 14:51:40 -0600 Received: from b03cxnp08028.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03cxnp08028.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.20]) by d03dlp03.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7827319D8040 for ; Fri, 2 May 2014 14:51:33 -0600 (MDT) Received: from d03av06.boulder.ibm.com (d03av06.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.245]) by b03cxnp08028.gho.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id s42KpcNR3015126 for ; Fri, 2 May 2014 22:51:38 +0200 Received: from d03av06.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av06.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id s42KtR8t027393 for ; Fri, 2 May 2014 14:55:27 -0600 Date: Fri, 2 May 2014 13:51:38 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Jiri Kosina Message-ID: <20140502205138.GA19798@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] stable workflow Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 09:42:04PM +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote: > I am a responsible maintainer of kernels for SUSE enterprise products. As > such, I am dealing with -stable trees on a regular basis. Hence, if there > is any discussion related to -stable tree process going to happen, I am > highly interested in that discussion. > > I'd like to re-iterate my usual question / discussion topic of > responsibility distribution for -stable patches; my proposal again would > be to align the -stable tree workflow with Linus' tree workflow -- i.e. > subsystem maintainers preparing 'for-stable' branches and sending pull > requests to the stable team, instead of rather random cherry-picking of > the patches from the air as they fly by the stable team members. > > Suggested participants: stable team, major distro kernel maintainers Just for historical interest, there was extensive discussion of this topic last year: https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/paulmck/LKS/LKS2013Topic/000014a.html The resulting discussion at LKS is recorded here: http://lwn.net/Articles/571980/ Thanx, Paul