On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 7:30 PM, Ben Hutchings <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 2013-10-10 at 11:37 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Kamal Mostafa <kamal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > This is the start of the review cycle for the Linux 3.8.13.11 stable kernel. >> >> Would anybody be interested in adding some sort of "stable" tag to the >> subject lines of stable backport patches, e.g., instead of: >> >> [PATCH 001/104] htb: fix sign extension bug >> >> something like: >> >> [STABLE 3.8.13.11 001/104] htb: fix sign extension bug >> >> I don't mind having the stable patches on LKML, but it would be nice >> if it were easier to distinguish stable backports from new patches. I >> know the patches are nicely threaded behind this message, but some >> readers don't really pay attention to that. > > I agree that some distinction is needed, but I'm not convinced about > that precise format. I don't think it's worth including version > components after the stable base version e.g. 3.2. And I think that > including the version is a big enough clue that this is for a stable > branch and not mainline. > > So I've changed my review script to put a subject prefix of 'PATCH 3.2' > before the patch number (and similarly in the cover letter). But if > there's consensus that a more explicit tag is wanted then I'll follow > that. Selfishly, I would just like something gmail can filter on. I've seen an "X-Extended-Stable: 3.8" header, which would be perfect, except that I can't figure out how to create a gmail filter for random headers. So I was hoping for something stable-specific in the subject line, but that's just to compensate for gmail's limitations. Bjorn -- 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