On Monday 15 of October 2012 10:40:11 Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 07:50:13AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > Well, please don't tag patches for -stable, because -stable doesn't > > take _patches_. > > Really, I didn't know that?! :-) > > > It takes commits from the Linus' tree and backports them and that's > > maintainer's job to tag them for -stable, not yours. > > You're not serious, right? This is not the case in at least 50% of the > cases. > > And this is OK because maintainers don't always know whether the patch > should be tagged for stable. So yes, people should add the stable tag > and yes, committers still have a veto over it. > > And yes, Andreas and I *know* how stable patches get applied, thank you > very much. I didn't say you didn't know that. > [ … ] > > > Yes, they do, but that means it doesn't make sense to send them stuff > > before it's been merged, right? > > Ok, I get it, you don't want people to send patches to stable@vger > *before* they've hit mainline. > > Nothing in <Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt> states that > stable@vger shouldn't get CCed on submissions unless the patch is > upstream and besides, stable@vger gets CCed in a lot of discussions > anyway so there's other traffic just the same. > > Bottomline: If you think people shouldn't spam stable@vger, then tough > luck - I don't think you can stop people from accidentally/due to the > automated nature of the process, CC stable. Even if it said so in the > above doc file. > > As a result, stable maintainers simply rely on scripts which verify the > patch is actually upstream before applying it to stable. Well, perhaps I shouldn't care too, then. :-) Thanks, Rafael -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
