On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 06:46:30PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote: > Yes, resending is sometimes needed, but what set me off here was your > comment that resending might not be enough even after you've now become > aware of a several-month old regression in your subsystem. If you're referring to my original reply I'm afraid to disappoint you but I hadn't read far enough in the backtrace to see anything except that people wanted me to look at a patch I didn't have a copy of (I didn't even know if I'd been CCed on the original posting). I was simply trying to say that it might be worth looking at other aspects of how the patch was sent - what you got there was basically a form letter type response to contentless pings. > I know you process a lot of mail, but perhaps some (further) filtering > could help avoid situations like this. The patch touches > drivers/regulator/ and has a stable tag for example. Neither of those is reliable enough for mechanical filtering for the things I'm doing here I'm afraid, and I especially don't think it would be a good idea people to get the idea that adding a stable tag is a good way of jumping the queue and it's not that reliable an indication of urgency (some development only issues that cause widespread breakage are much more urgent, some stable patches are for things that are definite issues with clear fixes but relatively low risk/impact).
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature