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 16DA8CA4 for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2018 01:17:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qk1-f172.google.com (mail-qk1-f172.google.com [209.85.222.172]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A003E7A6 for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2018 01:17:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qk1-f172.google.com with SMTP id j7-v6so3803656qkd.13 for ; Tue, 04 Sep 2018 18:17:50 -0700 (PDT) To: Guenter Roeck , Sasha Levin References: <5c9c41b2-14f9-41cc-ae85-be9721f37c86@redhat.com> <20180904213340.GD16300@sasha-vm> <7e4a1cb8-9f3c-e1ea-e9bd-5f1f3588ce65@roeck-us.net> <20180904231450.GE16300@sasha-vm> From: Laura Abbott Message-ID: <61221bc0-7610-36c6-496e-57b1a0d20eec@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2018 18:17:46 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: 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 09/04/2018 04:43 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On 09/04/2018 04:14 PM, Sasha Levin wrote: > [ ... ] >>> >>> Yes but with a longer -rc cycle we could have more time to actually >>> find those bugs before they get released and we could get more focused >>> testing. >> >> Indeed, but what's long enough? I'm sure that if we extend it to a month >> we'll find even more bugs; there's never "enough" testing. >> >> Maybe some concrete numbers will help here. Do you maybe know how many >> commits in the past year snuck past the -rc cycle into a stable release >> and found as buggy by Fedora's testing pipeline? >> > > ... and how many bugs were found during the existing test cycle ? > > The next question would be how many regressions were reported by users > after a release was published. > > The statistics I carried until early this year suggested a regression rate > of around 0.15% for stable releases, where regression means that a bug was > found post-release and had to be fixed later. It would indeed be interesting > to know how many of those were found by (automated ?) testing and how many > were found by users. > > Guenter I'd have to do some digging through bugzilla to get numbers. Some of this is also motivated by discussions with the CoreOS team who have also tried to use the stable kernels and ran into problems. I'll see if I can get some numbers. Thanks, Laura