On Tue 2018-04-17 16:19:35, Sasha Levin wrote: > On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 05:55:49PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > >On Tue 17-04-18 13:31:51, Sasha Levin wrote: > >> We may be able to guesstimate the 'regression chance', but there's no > >> way we can guess the 'annoyance' once. There are so many different use > >> cases that we just can't even guess how many people would get "annoyed" > >> by something. > > > >As a maintainer, I hope I have reasonable idea what are common use cases > >for my subsystem. Those I cater to when estimating 'annoyance'. Sure I don't > >know all of the use cases so people doing unusual stuff hit more bugs and > >have to report them to get fixes included in -stable. But for me this is a > >preferable tradeoff over the risk of regression so this is the rule I use > >when tagging for stable. Now I'm not a -stable maintainer and I fully agree > >with "those who do the work decide" principle so pick whatever patches you > >think are appropriate, I just wanted explain why I don't think more patches > >in stable are necessarily good. > > The AUTOSEL story is different for subsystems that don't do -stable, and > subsystems that are actually doing the work (like yourself). > > I'm not trying to override active maintainers, I'm trying to help them > make decisions. Ok, cool. Can you exclude LED subsystem, Hibernation and Nokia N900 stuff from autosel work? Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
