On 07/15/2013 05:21 PM, Greg KH wrote: >> >> However, it doesn't seem to happen too often, but it does underscore the >> need for a maintainer to be able to *retroactively* NAK a patch for >> stable, if it is uncovered that it isn't appropriate after all. > > I give maintainers 2 different chances to NAK a patch, and if they miss > those, I can also easily revert a patch that got applied and do a new > release, which I have done in the past. > Yes, it doesn't actually seem to be a problem in practice. In other words, the current system seems to work well, and unless someone wants to show cases where it doesn't work I don't see a reason to switch it... -hpa -- 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