On Mon, May 08, 2023 at 01:13:14PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Which afaics means that users of -rc1 are now affected by this and might > waste time bisecting a known issue that could easily have been fixed > already. :-/ That doesn't feel right. Or am I missing something? -rc1 is pretty much the most broken tree there is. And it is not an officially released tree but a, well, the first release candidate. So fixes are trickling in, there's lag between what gets found, when the maintainers pick it up and when it ends up upstream and so on and so on. Some fixes need longer testing because there have been cases where a fix breaks something else. And yes, maintainers can always expedite a fix or Linus will pick it up directly if it breaks a lot of boxes in a nasty way. So, long story short, I don't think you should track -rcs. You are tracking the reports already and you're tracking where their fixes land so I guess that's good enough. > /me wonders I he should start tracking regressions more closely during > the merge window to catch and prevent situations like this... I don't see a "situation" here. rcs can be broken for some use cases and that is fine as long as that breakage doesn't get released. Thx. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette