From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 72247FC11 for ; Sun, 14 Jul 2024 18:47:04 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1720982824; cv=none; b=duE4Aoj2Oiq1iUIJ/1ip0gntAfG9zbeN2+ziKEHYsEflH9A4Rd9DbwvisOrETqePsiztWVzy/Bpziy0Mul9dG/1oLo7NdN1774bKURHaqFy+e5kr4EKP2F07lDqF7ysEoybpSZ2/Ez8cBJxe7NZwSIGfSgcDuUkHQwHUmKt3LM0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1720982824; c=relaxed/simple; bh=7YJdOvlkUTfLEAP4HDHA8i626beRAL9M3JvGAmtQdRU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=D2xmtkcppd0u99lhsiPfqt5QcpcOS+bPZX88NM6tqhebYABYEHqVeD6K4VxPseWzQWl9G3cNIrN+l8FYdQcmgVkiRCrWbtcqOPVI0+XLWKxUaTwHeKFd/5BcudIw68Gl3ueZfz8kiYNwW3ib0Z/dYPDtZSRsjhQeNdR+ZYLR3YE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=qOT5RYM/; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="qOT5RYM/" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E6D13C116B1; Sun, 14 Jul 2024 18:47:03 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1720982824; bh=7YJdOvlkUTfLEAP4HDHA8i626beRAL9M3JvGAmtQdRU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=qOT5RYM/tMhR/zsIGmIrttIkDKl5dMbVbcL/VK7KPrWh9jLl/8NOO0+fcsquJfiTK wscCg95AXxu1ZBKiatgL4fYMB8DEop191XFfeq9l3vt2QHN9UP7+AM8qD6oZ8O51XF 6pXHprWifrl2tifXDyiR2P44dwQLV6473Wsv31Lneb/+JCwSSftkJr0kEnFu4hPoRF VH3yFkBWxDD8K+2ys7si48acaxalX369gOkiEhnJHeO8Uw6D72cMqIk8OWo+WwMOZ2 hiTVmnaugsA1VIJ4E77kuAn5tB9j3KdcCY3MPAs8RA21PjQVWgt9wks7jmpOxxcBBY 1geInKhPhvqqw== Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2024 14:47:02 -0400 From: Sasha Levin To: Linus Torvalds Cc: ksummit@lists.linux.dev, Greg KH Subject: Re: Proposal: Enhancing Commit Tagging for Stable Kernel Branches Message-ID: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: ksummit@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Sun, Jul 14, 2024 at 10:07:48AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: >On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 at 05:31, Sasha Levin wrote: >> >> One of the main issues is that most Fixes-tagged commits (>80%) end up >> in a stable tree, leading some authors to omit the Stable tag >> altogether. > >So as others have said, the fix to two confusing tags is not to >introduce *more* tags. That only adds to the confusion. > >I honestly personally will likely not ever use any more tags than the >ones we already have. Every single "let's add a new tag" proposal I've >ever seen has been pure garbage. > >People see one problem and want to fix it by introducing a tag, and >think tags magically would fix it, when adding more tags will only >cause more confusion and make the existing tags less obvious. I'm not trying to add an additional tag, but rather replace a "broken" tag by adding something that is better aligned with how people are doing things these days. For that matter, we can look at Linus Torvalds, a prominent Linux developer. In the past few years, Linus has authored: - 2023: 3 stable tagged commits. - 2022: 2 stable tagged commits. - 2021: 4 stable tagged commits. - 2020: 0 stable tagged commits. If we all agree that Linus authored more stable-worthy commits than that, then to me it's an indication that the stable tagging system isn't working well here. My thinking was that we can stop nagging folks about adding a stable tag and leverage their current (positive) behavior around adding fixes tags, but yes - training folks to use a new tag is hard. What's the path forward here? Stable tags don't work, "Improves:" tag might indeed be garbage, so what would make the folks who read this mailing list more consistent about tagging patches they author for backport? -- Thanks, Sasha