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 1A9CC7F49B for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2024 06:47:07 +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=1718952428; cv=none; b=ly7jCWtRclIynSQWbZPbvY8xyWimW1yafmFDQkpdhbOwAz8ZhMG1vabPhy0xJI/a4CiT8+RfiKYJX7uXeLTecCz/18e21zNjC2zVk/BbnK2h9CQDoiwldu0V7JSVKjY3dBcSz0I8z40+wbxNtcDnnerEk8w0vJa/nNwZ1/rjyfk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1718952428; c=relaxed/simple; bh=FVoRW/phNX6OAWTbQpEXkerHRYwQYmneklLSoDKW8t0=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=RswvvNiicidM6V86oSHdo4LGYVo7DERA5kCYmOJZEusEgGkNSwY6S4mDsO+dVQP/+qm8PtEctaYu2H5KUMncAw1My+V1kSKuRcDxvAMHvsLj7g1qZQPN54Q8qymUuYB/5hpfjG9mhTu27b1xmQEDXITWj2lWNl9PnS/0zqbkmJk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=WXUavA6U; 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="WXUavA6U" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4153BC2BBFC; Fri, 21 Jun 2024 06:47:07 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1718952427; bh=FVoRW/phNX6OAWTbQpEXkerHRYwQYmneklLSoDKW8t0=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=WXUavA6UKI8ONwQbVXQ4cWnl6zuBQnifvYGw33rQ5KENkZ7yQ3fxD+kK+IjMLd7ag 93rhyPHID8FBK+rAWpl1MG8oZgqSwrFoUV0YUaKfebMAlEWMTJlDnMkja+z3d3eyRg 7KrVJWVyCT5ajGHm1sfnTE/nDfwChiqSg0hNl/2RsFYN4pyJFxaZeeZYGpDpjNaTxe xQefpHF3pFdynEYEUNdYRajvV4JsOAxY0SdqPthvHbOAgrUGcp1iGFahtHzZ69As7j 6p1hikIyQrmTfHlX3kjsqK0ArAHvirOp+HyNAL5xa5ut+kshYU8T+zwhADaKE/lEYx Fr9T6IESq5DUQ== Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 08:47:03 +0200 (CEST) From: Jiri Kosina To: Thorsten Leemhuis cc: Jani Nikula , Laurent Pinchart , "ksummit@lists.linux.dev" Subject: Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] [3/4] Elevate handling of regressions that made it to releases deemed for end users In-Reply-To: <9e417917-91b9-4506-9fbe-d6436ed48b9e@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: References: <55e89d2c-fa25-4daa-805e-5aca31b321bf@leemhuis.info> <20240613113455.GH6019@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> <87jzijeony.fsf@intel.com> <9e417917-91b9-4506-9fbe-d6436ed48b9e@leemhuis.info> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (LSU 202 2017-01-01) 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 On Thu, 20 Jun 2024, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Not totally against that, but the thing is: in a earlier local draft it > used to be like that. And then I noticed that this will add another week > when it comes to the merge window. I'll be repeating myself, but I personally really don't like any such strong timelines in kernel documentation. You are increasing the pressure on maintainers for no benefit. Everybody of course tries to get the regressions fixed as soon as possible once it's identified. Sometimes it takes longer, because it's complex. Sometimes people are on holidays. Sometimes it just falls in between cracks, and people need to be pinged to look into that. Kernel documentation wording is not going to stop any of that. Also it might be setting unrealistic expectations at the user/reporter side. -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs