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 367408AF for ; Fri, 2 May 2014 23:35:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pa0-f51.google.com (mail-pa0-f51.google.com [209.85.220.51]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C058F1FC50 for ; Fri, 2 May 2014 23:35:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pa0-f51.google.com with SMTP id fb1so6200206pad.38 for ; Fri, 02 May 2014 16:35:38 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Guenter Roeck Date: Fri, 2 May 2014 16:35:31 -0700 From: Guenter Roeck To: Mark Brown Message-ID: <20140502233531.GC5157@roeck-us.net> References: <20140502205721.GY3245@sirena.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140502205721.GY3245@sirena.org.uk> Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] stable workflow List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 01:57:22PM -0700, Mark Brown wrote: > 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. > > Likewise for me with my work hat on, I maintain a stable kernel for > Linaro for use on ARM systems. > I wold be interested in this subject as kernel maintainer for Juniper, and because I run a series of automated tests on the 'official' stable release candidates. > > 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. > > With my upstream hat on I have to say this seems like a lot of work and > probably means that most stable fixes that currently go out probably > just won't happen - there are quite a lot of stable trees being > maintained and I personally have next to no immediate interest in most > of them. Same here. If I (or Jean) think that some patch should be applied to -stable, I add Cc: stable to the patch before I send it to Linus, or I send a request to the stable mailing list. Sending pull requests for each of those releases would add a lot of overhead to that process. And I agree with the comment that some 'bad' commits might sneak in. The other side, of course, is that especially Greg must spend a lot of his time on maintaining stable releases. If there is a way to offload some of this work from him, I would be all for it; I am just not convinced that pull requests would be the solution. Guenter