From: Wolfgang Walter <[email protected]> Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 18:57:13 +0200
> But when we are at it: I think that when a bug in a stable kernel is > found and the final fix is known it is bad practice to hord that > patch till submission without letting stable@ know about it. I think you have no idea what goes into vetting patches for -stable. It can take me days to put together a series, and also I time my -stable submissions with when Linus pulls my 'net' bug fixes into his tree since a part of the -stable requirements is presence in Linus's tree. I therefore batch, because bleeding out individual fixes one by one to -stable rarely, if ever, makes sense. And another part of what goes into vetting a patch is time. The longer a patch sits in a non-stable tree getting tested, the more likely any unwanted bugs and side effects will be caught before the patch goes into -stable. And finally I am under no obligation whatsoever to post some kind of status report to -stable every few days saying when I'll do this or that. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
