[Sorry I'm cutting out lots of stuff here, I just want to understand the point below first]
On 04/21/2016 10:54 AM, Jiri Slaby wrote: > On 04/21/2016, 03:53 PM, Sasha Levin wrote: >>> Pardom my ignorance, how can you actually be sure? >> >> I'm not, same way you can't be sure about your stable patch selection either. > > I repeat I am not doing any selection. > > Patches are not included iff they do not apply and I am not confident > enough to backport them. In that case, a FAILED message is sent to the > authors. And when the authors don't care about that, the patch is not > included. > >> A commit that may not look to you like stable material might turn out to be >> one, >> so how is this different for stable-security? > > I do not select. So how exactly do commits go into your stable tree? When I'm doing my stable work, I go through a range of mainline commits, see which ones are stable material and follow the stable rules, and cherry pick them to my tree. So at least in my case, there is patch selection every time I work on a stable tree. I may end up thinking a given commit is not stable material, and people may point out that it is, so I may end up going back and cherry picking it later. Have it never happened with any of your trees? Thanks, Sasha
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
