From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2016 00:06:31 +0000 From: Jason Cooper To: Jiri Kosina Message-ID: <20160709000631.GB8989@io.lakedaemon.net> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] stable workflow List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi Jiri, On Sat, Jul 09, 2016 at 12:35:09AM +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote: > I'd like to see an attempt to make the stable workflow more oriented > towards "maintainers sending pull requests" rather than "random people > pointing to patches that should go to stable". How does that differ from "Cc: stable.." ? In my experience, it's mostly the maintainers adding that tag after looking at the commit it "Fixes", if the commit id was provided. Admittedly, my exposure is limited to ARM mvebu and irqchip for the most part. Do you want pull requests in order to limit patches to only from maintainers? Or to include a series of patches that have had more testing against specific kernel versions? Do you have a sense of the specific regressions that cause people to give up on -stable? thx, Jason.