On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 06:28:50PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > >> >> Is there a reason not to take LED fixes if they fix a bug and don't >> >> cause a regression? Sure, we can draw some arbitrary line, maybe >> >> designate some subsystems that are more "important" than others, but >> >> what's the point? >> > >> >There's a tradeoff. >> > >> >You want to fix serious bugs in stable, and you really don't want >> >regressions in stable. And ... stable not having 1000s of patches >> >would be nice, too. >> >> I don't think we should use a number cap here, but rather look at the >> regression rate: how many patches broke something? >> >> Since the rate we're seeing now with AUTOSEL is similar to what we were >> seeing before AUTOSEL, what's the problem it's causing? > >Regression rate should not be the only criteria. > >More patches mean bigger chance customer's patches will have a >conflict with something in -stable, for example. Out of tree patches can't be a consideration here. There are no guarantees for out of tree code, ever.
