Hello Artur, On Tue, Jun 06, 2023 at 03:18:31PM +0200, Artur wrote: > About the backporting instructions I was not sure how far it should be > backported. I preferred to skip it instead of giving an erroneous > instruction. > Maybe someone can explain if this backport instruction is really required > and what to do if one is unsure about how to backport.
You should see them as a time saver for the person doing the backports, that's why we like patch authors to provide as much useful information as they can. Sometimes even just adding "this patch probably needs to be backported" or "the feature was already there in 2.7 and maybe before so the patch may need to be backported at least there" will be a hint to the person that they should really check twice if they don't find it the first time. As a rule of thumb, just keep in mind that the commit message part of a patch is the one where humans talk to humans, and that anything that crosses your head and that can help decide if a patch has to be backported, could be responsible for a regression, needs to be either fixed or reverted etc is welcome. Thanks, Willy
