On 13.12.24 17:30, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> Add some advice on how to handle regressions as developer, reviewer, and >> maintainer, as resolving regression without unnecessary delays requires >> multiple people working hand in hand. >> >> This removes equivalent paragraphs from a section in >> Documentation/process/handling-regressions.rst, which will become mostly >> obsolete through this and follow-up changes. >> >> Signed-off-by: Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> Documentation/process/6.Followthrough.rst | 24 ++++++++++++++++--- >> .../process/handling-regressions.rst | 16 ------------- >> 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) > > Nothing really to complain about here (though I do worry a bit about the > idea that calling something a regression fix allows bypassing all of our > usual testing). Well, from Linus statements on the recent maintainers summit it seems he does not care too much about that. But I had a similar feeling, which is why I softened that bit somewhat into that "They for example are not required to spend time in linux-next, but depending on the fix and the alignment with pull requests it might be beneficial to have them in there for a day or two." Ciao, Thorsten
