Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] Issues with stable process

[Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 918 bytes --]

On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 09:02:26PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:

> But I highly doubt that having them sit in next for two weeks would
> change that. Again, the code that the patches fix was already in next,
> and the original bug was never found there. What makes you think bugs
> in the fix patches will be any different?

Two weeks seems excessive but having them there for a -next build means
the automated stuff has a chance to kick in which is 90% of what -next
gives us in terms of quality.  The benefit does depend on how likely the
change is to be affected by system/platform/config specific issues.

Indeed depending on the bug having things forced to sit in -next for too
long can be a real problem - I've had people refusing to fix build
errors in Linus' tree for a week as they wanted things to cook in -next
which took out automated testing of Linus' tree (and anything that
merged it) for the duration.

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]