[Ksummit-2012-discuss] [ATTEND] stable kernel stuff and grumpy maintainers

Jiri Kosina jkosina at suse.cz
Wed Jun 20 08:48:45 UTC 2012

On Wed, 20 Jun 2012, James Bottomley wrote:

> > My whole point when initiating this discussion was how easy we'd like to 
> > make it for distros to cherry-pick patches from -stable in cases when they 
> > are in development phases in which they can't afford taking the whole 
> > -stable release.
> > 
> > Going through all the changelogs, and analyzing whether it's appropriate 
> > as a "super-crucial-must-have" bugfix or not is very time consuming and 
> > not really easy, especially if done by someone who is not in daily contact 
> > with the code in question.
> > 
> > So I agree that "Impact:" or "Fixes:" lines are mostly useless in Linus' 
> > (any most of the other) trees, but I'd personally very appreciate those in 
> > -stable from the distribution (i.e. customer of -stable) point of view.
> But Jiri, whether a bug is super critical or not depends on *your* 
> distro viewpoint, not that of the person writing the change log.  As you 
> already said, what constitutes critical changes as the distro release 
> goes forwards.  How can you really expect us to make that decision for 
> you?  The best we can really do is describe exactly and concisely what 
> the problem and the fix is in the change log and let you decide if it 
> meets your criteria.

Agreed, and I am of course not asking anybody to decide for distros; just 
trying to make the decision process easier for them.

Even such a minimal categorization of bugs such as

- support for new HW (so that we can drop those immediately, even 
  automatically, in certain development phases)
- performance improvement
- crash fix
- security fix
- platform/hw-specific fix

will, I believe, be a good start.


Jiri Kosina

More information about the Ksummit-2012-discuss mailing list