[Ksummit-2012-discuss] [ATTEND] stable kernel stuff and grumpy maintainers
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.
More information about the Ksummit-2012-discuss