Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] The amount of -stable emails

[Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>]

On Tue, Aug 05, 2025 at 12:49:02PM -0400, James Bottomley wrote:
>On Tue, 2025-08-05 at 17:38 +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote:
>> This proposal is coming as a followup to the brief IRC discussion
>> that happened a few months back.
>>
>> The amount of e-mails that are coming (with maintainers directly
>> CCed) as a result of patches being merged to -stable is so
>> overwhelming that I am not sure that people are making any productive
>> use of it whatsoever.
>>
>> I am personally pretty much ignoring most of it, as (a) I wouldn't
>> have time to do anything else otherwise (b) I don't have a sufficient
>> motivation / time to invest effort into stable in the fist place.
>>
>> I feel it'd be beneficial to discuss this, and (depending on the
>> outcome)perhaps make it opt-in (or opt-out) at least, with
>> people/subsystems  having means how to be excluded from all that ...
>> ?
>
>Actually, if stable emails just had a header tag, it would be easy for
>procmail to sort them out ... which is what I've been asking for for
>years.  X-Stable-Base: and X-Stable: seem to be reasonably common and
>catch most of it, but codifying the use in the kernel documentation and
>using them consistently would really help.

Do we have any stable-related mails that don't have an X-Stable: header?

-- 
Thanks,
Sasha