On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 07:11:14PM +0200, David Sterba wrote: >On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 04:42:34PM +0000, Sasha Levin wrote: >> Hi. >> >> [This is an automated email] >> >> This commit has been processed by the -stable helper bot and determined >> to be a high probability candidate for -stable trees. (score: 9.9156) >> >> The bot has tested the following trees: v4.15.15, v4.14.32, v4.9.92, >> v4.4.126, >> >> v4.15.15: Build OK! >> v4.14.32: Build OK! >> v4.9.92: Build OK! >> v4.4.126: Build OK! >> >> Please let us know if you'd like to have this patch included in a stable >> tree. > >Yes, in this case we expect that the Fixes: tag will let the patch flow >to stable after it gets applied to master. > >The automated stable candidate patch scanning would be helpful in cases >where the Fixes tag is not identified or we forget to add it. I don't >mind helping to train the bot, so I'll try respond to the messages.
Just to clarify, having just the "Fixes:" tag is not necessarily an indicator that a patch should go into -stable. For example, if I fix up documentation and add a Fixes: tag to point to the commit that added the original documentation, it's not -stable material since we don't take documentation patches. Or, if the patch that the new commit fixes didn't make it into any releases, it's not stable material either.-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
