Re: [patch 00/50] 2.6.25.6 -stable review

From: Jeff Garzik
Date: Sun Jun 08 2008 - 16:09:28 EST


Jay Cliburn wrote:
On Sun, 08 Jun 2008 07:10:51 -0700 (PDT)
David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


If you ask me in the future about the status of a -stable
patch from the networking, I'll let you know exactly what
is happening to that patch wrt. stable. I rarely forget
to submit an appropriate patch, and when I do forget you
merely have to let me know (rather than submitting it
to -stable directly, please don't do that) so that I can
fit it in with what I plan to submit to -stable already.


As a netdev driver maintainer, I've been following this workflow for
patches that need to go to -stable:

1. I submit a mainline patch to Jeff Garzik.
2. Jeff submits to David.
3. David submits to Linus.
4. Linus merges patch into mainline.
5. I extract mainline commit ID.
6. I apply and test patch against appropriate 2.6.x.y git tree.
7. I submit patch directly to -stable.

David's admonition tells me I'm doing it wrong, and that I should
submit the stable patch to Jeff as well. Am I right?

I usually encourage a more-parallel process where you simply email stable@xxxxxxxxxx with the upstream commit id of the change(s) in question.

Jeff



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/