Hi! Good question!
It would be great to merge fixes in all stable branches at once. The author understands best what problem he has encountered and how to fix it correctly . I saw several times how problems were reported to us for version 2, but fixes were brought to the main branch. I think we should instruct commiters to adopt their fixes to all of the stable supported branches. Just like it happens in postgres. Let's change our policies how we work with bugfixes. And a separate question is whether we want to backport features. I think there is no by default, but the author decides If he thinks that it can be easily backported and does not threaten stability, you can backport. On Fri, Aug 21, 2026 at 5:18 AM Jinbao Chen <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Team, > > I hope you are all doing well. > > Currently, I am backporting a large volume of commits from the main branch > to REL_2_STABLE. > Although this task is nearing completion, the process along the way has > clearly been quite confusing. > > We need to clarify two key questions here: > > 1. Which commits should be backported? > 2. Who should be responsible for the backporting work? > > > First of all, I believe that if a commit is a bug fix, and that same bug > also exists in the stable version, then the commit should be submitted to > the stable branch. If it is a feature, we should not backport it unless > there is a definitive reason to do so. > > Furthermore, the backporting work should be done by the original author of > the commit. This time, a single person had to backport so many commits all > at once. It is very difficult for me to deeply understand the context and > purpose of every single commit, and it is impossible to carefully review > every line of code. This has brought huge challenges to the job, and it > also makes it very hard for me to determine whether a commit should be > backported or not > > Above are my thoughts on this. Please let me know your thoughts or feedback > on this proposal. >
