Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 28 Aug 2009 10:23:38 +0200 | From | Stefan Richter <> | Subject | Re: Would it help to encourage users to read/test stable-review patches |
| |
Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> More review never hurts, but do you think there's a specific lack or >> problem? > > Not really, I was thinking about the fellow Ubunteros users who tend > to not have a clue but sometimes enough good will to want to help. If > the average user understood better the upstream process then perhaps > it would become clearer to them the importance of stable patches and > stable-review.
Shouldn't these people rather get started with "the other stable kernel", called 2.6.x-rcZ? And the next level would be to either test -next or follow the master branch of a subsystem development tree of their interest.
I think it could be more effective overall to activate more people who watch for regressions in the mainline, send qualified and early regression reports, and test candidate fixes. A side effect of better -rc kernels will be a shallower 2.6.x.y branch queue.
Patches which are submitted for stable-review should already have been tested as part of the upstream kernel on affected and unaffected systems. As Chris wrote, patches which obviously need further field testing when backported to -stable are per definition too risky for -stable in the first place. -stable submission should be low-risk cherry-picking.
> Bringing users closer to stable-review to me indicates > more users would understand the stable process and therefore would > stop bitching to me when a 'non-cirtical' fix never made it into their > ancient stable. Cc'ing one of those.
Ah, you have especially /these/ people in mind. Well, set up a clever procmail filter which autoresponds with a pointer to Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt... :-) -- Stefan Richter -=====-==--= =--- ===-- http://arcgraph.de/sr/
| |