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 943CFE55A for ; Tue, 5 Aug 2025 18:01:16 +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=1754416877; cv=none; b=AdnXUw3kJfVd6Ijv8PWUCz8KuTMdLqKnNgupqg3svjR0Rzl9/BHPD2oU9bWHqouJROFJiHzNl8g3uPFKbAQcVirVTM/9pZpW93CCdr+Ylq2c658B3Sjmj+PEu77SN+5tiL8qUy4FXGsBl8G0de1eEd7ILAEODi2u4py22xAVC6k= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1754416877; c=relaxed/simple; bh=WQ59Q//gTbXqhkh+MIYUxhv6LNYEjow17oASEVC/PWk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Om1tqj4D2mwxoQFsRivhYKTyHJEF/szr+wXgBRWN1wHim4KiuhZrhqA+dO6QH0ipTQMtGCwMdw5rswC+/SGzc+e0zGiQG1+mGSBsFmvCHpqVcz67tNUToHhbsCtyCyWp7iwXHkmgcWb4xIGGPLz929AfUjj6W0jxfneRoN5rUAA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=psXfS1bX; 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="psXfS1bX" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E82CBC4CEF6; Tue, 5 Aug 2025 18:01:15 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1754416876; bh=WQ59Q//gTbXqhkh+MIYUxhv6LNYEjow17oASEVC/PWk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=psXfS1bX4Tw96Thkbrtg7LetCL4Efxnd0Zb6rUNsu5dNUZYFwQDYgxl1LoFUvI2j2 aw4M2QF847h+4dMbSk51whL8ZDTDJu8aqNCK/8ZyAGmN/m8uXZkMqpQIZys6Ai1FRN HCYJg0qpJ+3eFSpjXhdnzyQoMA96bw+BHSKvIbTJ1BxRMrWLVflVPF5zq99fvjC4Wb Pf4PS+OOEHvurS3BQdYpm5w2DTKcBpFf+/c+i7OQ+82Z4LgtpMVfVDL0CyEmkMSczt THJ92d28yEb9xjk9xhQbSCWSnjvQfIFdhlXpUW36AOYrUynrcCbJzmOgQQ1BCIvCvE lg4WxpwFjwBqQ== Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2025 14:01:14 -0400 From: Sasha Levin To: James Bottomley Cc: Jiri Kosina , ksummit@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] The amount of -stable emails Message-ID: References: <162r47q9-rp56-67so-7032-2r1rn36p03n6@fhfr.pbz> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: ksummit@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: On Tue, Aug 05, 2025 at 01:33:39PM -0400, James Bottomley wrote: >On Tue, 2025-08-05 at 13:26 -0400, Sasha Levin wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 05, 2025 at 12:49:02PM -0400, James Bottomley wrote: >[...] >> > 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? > >It seems to be mostly working for now, but what I often find is the >header changes on a whim and the filter stops working. And, since >nothing is written down, we all have to guess again what it means. If >you're confident this one's not going to change, why not document it >and commit to using it in the stable process docs? It will probably need to be bigger than that: we'd need to document the overall expectations and process before we document some of the nits in it. -- Thanks, Sasha