On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 11:26 PM, Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > - Show quoted text - > On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 10:44:40PM -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 9:57 PM, Jeff Garzik <jeff@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> >> >> >> While extending the documentation for submitting Linux wireless bug >> >> reports [1] we note the stable series policy on patches -- that of >> >> having an equivalent fix already in Linus' tree. I find this >> >> documented in Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt but I'm curious if >> >> there is any other resource which documents this or elaborates on this >> >> a bit more. I often tell people about this rule or push _really_ hard >> >> on testing "upstream" but some people tend to not understand. I think >> >> that elaborating a little on this can help and will hopefully create >> >> more awareness around the importance of trees like Stephen's >> >> linux-next tree. >> > >> > Just have people google for GregKH's copious messages, telling people a fix >> > needs to be upstream before it goes into -stable. >> > >> > Typically you make things easy by emailing stable@xxxxxxxxxx with a commit >> > id. >> > >> > There are only two exceptions: >> > * fix is upstream, but needs to be modified for -stable >> > * fix is not needed at all in upstream, but -stable still needs it >> >> This certainly helps, I'm also looking for good arguments to support >> the reasoning behind the policy so that not only will people follow >> this to help development but _understand_ it and so that they can >> themselves promote things like linux-next and realize why its so >> important. Mind you -- upstream for us in wireless for example is not >> Linus its John's tree so what we promote is not to get the fix first >> into Linus' tree but first into John's tree. Which is obvious to >> developers but perhaps not to others. > > Who are these "people" that you are trying to convince? OK small silly example is convincing distributions it may be a good idea to carry linux-next kernel packages as options to users to hopefully down the road reduce the delta between what they carry and what is actually upstream. > If they aren't > developers, why would any "others" care about our development > proceedures? Right -- in this case above "others" could be developers but could also be distribution guys. Essentially I was looking for arguments to push and show why linux-next is the next best thing since sliced bread for all those nasty deltas. Which OK -- maybe they can never disappear (?) but hopefully it can at least be reduced in size over time. > Heck, very few developers even read the Documentation files, I'd never > expect an "other" to do that :) Heh.. Maybe I expect too much of people and things. Luis -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
