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 B8F4A13FD92; Thu, 11 Apr 2024 09:13:50 +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=1712826830; cv=none; b=mqap+kwkU7X/wBx/ay0kBvz4TWJi0V3wBMvT9C0v7wQKLjmyl3bRpa7hkreyrmKvM5DWtt8yJct8bllns0OSile0ZolrbEUU2IrcO9njt/HCEx8ur2nQK1Z5FVCu+FVZB8wbO1PTpgjqrSVMN7iAT3RcUlpDra7pPk7dbqzWJlI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712826830; c=relaxed/simple; bh=s6ENZFSjQ6+ecFmzLviY1DdLzFy5bePidVMCMUX/CCY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=OacCzb3wjj/c08meEJzCGpY4UQvwL2oy8VnrH0e2jKt1NmjVm44ndfHI+tpvt50Fc2EePKaMlb1OqKUKtPTP/jzKTiSfB6oUm+gHWItA9hRM97oitoI1/uoD9qIvRnlqfge0UcLZlzUX+5MUC69qUopJuRPDcpqRgfgr5n8cbyY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b=VU+jY1w8; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b="VU+jY1w8" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D233EC433C7; Thu, 11 Apr 2024 09:13:49 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1712826830; bh=s6ENZFSjQ6+ecFmzLviY1DdLzFy5bePidVMCMUX/CCY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=VU+jY1w8SnngczpBjeisADAOlFiQt+mnZyyaSXoal63iv1oWfNFuT5wUNFa6/bx6d 6sOpq7E26LO4OSN27yU1D21HuzSLLg/kTMyzAjTjgXf7c50ZrSc4D4/lWtmXz/0hxN NN5qWk70uMBZRHprUxJroUkre9AgGyUFhUUep91s= Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2024 11:13:47 +0200 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Thorsten Leemhuis Cc: Sasha Levin , Jonathan Corbet , stable@vger.kernel.org, workflows@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/4] docs: stable-kernel-rules: mention "no semi-automatic backport" Message-ID: <2024041159-undone-deacon-3170@gregkh> References: <2024041156-backache-dolly-a420@gregkh> <3f395eca-fc24-469b-b5fc-de47ab2a6861@leemhuis.info> <2024041123-earthling-primarily-4656@gregkh> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: workflows@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 09:50:24AM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > On 11.04.24 09:40, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 08:59:39AM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > >> On 11.04.24 07:29, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > >>> On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 07:25:04AM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > >>>> Some developers deliberately steer clear of 'Fixes:' tags to prevent > >>>> changes from being backported semi-automatically by the stable team. > >>>> That somewhat undermines the reason for the existence of the Fixes: tag, > >>>> hence point out there is an alternative to reach the same effect. > > [...] > >>> I do not understand, why are you saying "cc: stable" here if you do NOT > >>> want it backported? > >> Because the only alternative the developers have to make the stable team > >> not pick a single patch[1] is to deliberately omit a Fixes: tag even if > >> the patch normally should have one. Like it was done here: > >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/cover.1712226175.git.antony.antony@secunet.com/ > > That feels odd, but ok I now see the need for this for some minor set of > > changes (i.e. this has rarely come up in the past 15+ years) > > > > [...] > >> E.g. 'ignore for the AUTOSEL and the "Fixes tag only" tools'. That was > >> the best term I came up with. > > > > Thinking about it more, I think we need to be much more explicit, and > > provide the reason why. > > > > How about: > > cc: # Reason goes here, and must be present > > > > and we can make that address be routed to /dev/null just like > > is? > > Totally fine with me, but that feels somewhat long and hard to type. I want it long and hard to type and very very explicit that this is what the developer/maintainer wants to have happen (again, because this is such a rare occurrence.) > How > about just 'no-stable@kernel.org' (or 'nostable@kernel.org')? More words are better :) thanks, greg k-h