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 ESMTPS id 0BF981108 for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2018 14:27:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from NAM01-BN3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn3nam01on0129.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.33.129]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 67CC32D5 for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2018 14:27:31 +0000 (UTC) From: Sasha Levin To: Mark Brown Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2018 14:27:29 +0000 Message-ID: <20180905142728.GJ16300@sasha-vm> References: <5c9c41b2-14f9-41cc-ae85-be9721f37c86@redhat.com> <20180904213340.GD16300@sasha-vm> <20180905081658.GB24902@quack2.suse.cz> <1536141525.8121.2.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20180905104700.GE9781@sirena.org.uk> <6a25761a-c640-4eb2-952c-4bcd91da28a2@email.android.com> <20180905131643.GM9781@sirena.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20180905131643.GM9781@sirena.org.uk> Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: James Bottomley , Greg KH , "ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINER SUMMIT] Stable trees and release time List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 02:16:43PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: >On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 01:24:18PM +0100, James Bottomley wrote: > >> I absolutely agree. That's why I said our process is expediency >> based: you have to trade off the value of applying the patch vs the >> probability of introducing bugs. However the maintainers are mostly >> considering this which is why stable is largely free from trivial but >> pointless patches. The rule should be: if it doesn't fix a user >> visible bug, it doesn't go into stable. > >It's not just maintainers any more - in particular we've got Sasha's >neural net thing picking patches as well and it's substantially more >trigger happy than at least I am. People do get a chance to review what >it's picking but that's different to maintainers picking things. What can I do to make the process better? I tried giving longer review periods, I tried sending emails right when the patch is merged upstream instead of weeks later and I tried actively pursuing some maintainers for explicit Acks. None of which seemed to make anyone happier. -- Thanks, Sasha=