On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 06:28:50PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
>> >> Is there a reason not to take LED fixes if they fix a bug and don't
>> >> cause a regression? Sure, we can draw some arbitrary line, maybe
>> >> designate some subsystems that are more "important" than others, but
>> >> what's the point?
>> >There's a tradeoff.
>> >You want to fix serious bugs in stable, and you really don't want
>> >regressions in stable. And ... stable not having 1000s of patches
>> >would be nice, too.
>> I don't think we should use a number cap here, but rather look at the
>> regression rate: how many patches broke something?
>> Since the rate we're seeing now with AUTOSEL is similar to what we were
>> seeing before AUTOSEL, what's the problem it's causing?
>Regression rate should not be the only criteria.
>More patches mean bigger chance customer's patches will have a
>conflict with something in -stable, for example.
Out of tree patches can't be a consideration here. There are no
guarantees for out of tree code, ever.