On 07/01/2022 17:51, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
On 07.01.22 16:37, Matthias Brugger wrote:
On 07/01/2022 15:21, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
Create a document explaining various aspects around regression handling
and tracking both for users and developers. Among others describe the
first rule of Linux kernel development and what it means in practice.
Also explain what a regression actually is and how to report one
properly. The text additionally provides a brief introduction to the bot
the kernel's regression tracker uses to facilitate his work. To sum
things up, provide a few quotes from Linus to show how serious he takes
regressions.
Signed-off-by: Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[...]
+The important bits for people fixing regressions
+================================================
+
+When receiving regression reports by mail, check if the reporter CCed
`the
+regression mailing list <https://lore.kernel.org/regressions/>`_
+(regressions@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx). If not, forward or bounce the report
to the Linux
+kernel's regression tracker (regressions@xxxxxxxxxxxxx), unless you
plan on
I would have expected it to be the same mailing list
(regressions@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx), is this a typo maybe?
Thx for taking a look. Hmm. That's possible, but I (and the grep call I
just ran) fail to spot the typo.
Maybe the wording is to confusing: regressions@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx is the
list, regressions@xxxxxxxxxxxxx is a dedicated email address I (the
kernel's regression tracker) use for regression tracking (which reminds
me: maybe I should ask for a alias like regressions@xxxxxxxxxx or
regression-tracker@xxxxxxxxxx).
Yes it's the wording then :)
Anyway I just wonder why you we should send the regression to the regressions
email list, but only to the tracker email address. For me that's the confusing
part. I'd expect to send it to the list as well and the tracker takes it from
there. If for any reason someone does not want to send a regression to the list,
then he can send it to the tracker directly. That's my understanding of how this
works. If that's correct then I'd say we should just explain the difference.
Regards,
Matthias
Ciao, Thorsten
