On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 10:49:21AM +0800, zhangwei(Jovi) wrote: > On 2013/2/28 10:28, Greg KH wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 10:10:51AM +0800, zhangwei(Jovi) wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> I'm writing this mail to ask one question about Linux stable inclusion, > >> I would appreciate if you can give me some hints. > >> > >> As our known: > >> Grey KH is maintainer of 3.4 stable tree, > > > > And 3.0, and 3.8 :) > > > >> Paul is maintainer of 2.6.34 stable tree, > >> Willy is maintainer of 2.6.27 stable tree. > >> > >> Is there have any possibility some stable patches merged into 3.4 stable tree, > >> but _missed_ in 2.6.34 and 2.6.27 stable tree? since each stable tree is maintained > >> by different person. > >> (the stable patches here I mean could applied to each stable tree correctly) > > > > Sure, we might miss patches, that's just the nature of the business. If > > you notice any that are missed, please let us know. > Hmm, I think all stable maintainers use same channel, stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Yes. > if all maintainers watch all patches in this mailing list, then check it if the patch > could apply to own stable tree cleanly, then this will avoid miss patches. > (what I mean is we can share all stable patches among stable kernel tree) Yes, we try to do this, but of course, we are human, and miss things at times. > this is not the workflow of stable maintainers currently? or if this > workflow is too hard to make in reality? No, you are correct, it is just that none of us guarantee anything :) What we can do, is use the help of people like you to ensure that we don't miss patches. Can you help us out with this? thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html