Re: [PATCH v3.1415] Documentation: add documentation summary forrc-series and merge window
From: Li Zefan
Date: Mon Jun 22 2009 - 20:57:26 EST
Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> This is losely based on previous discussions on linux-kernel .
> Lets also refer people reading the stable rules to
> Also add the number of days it has taken between releases,
> and provide the average for the last 10 releases: 86.0 days.
>  http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122048427801324&w=2
>  http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=122048757705315&w=2
>  http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=124515657407679&w=2
I've gone through the patch, and found some typos.
> Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <lrodriguez@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Documentation/development-process/2.Process | 158 +++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt | 5 +
> 2 files changed, 153 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> diff --git a/Documentation/development-process/2.Process b/Documentation/development-process/2.Process
> index d750321..d4ca05d 100644
> --- a/Documentation/development-process/2.Process
> +++ b/Documentation/development-process/2.Process
> @@ -7,20 +7,158 @@ course of one year, the kernel has since had to evolve a number of
> processes to keep development happening smoothly. A solid understanding of
> how the process works is required in order to be an effective part of it.
> +This section provides a brief summary of the kernel release rules.
> +2.0.0: KERNEL RELEASE RULES
> +Stable kernels are released when they are ready! This means there are
> +absolutely no strict guidelines for sticking to specific dates for a
> +kernel release.
> +2.0.1: PATCH QUEUING FOR THE NEXT KERNEL RELEASE
> +Linus maintains the development kernel, this means he accepts new
> +features and drivers for the next kernel release. He however does not
> +maintain every single line of the kernel. The kernel is broken down by
> +different subsystems and each subsystem has its own maintainer. In order
Maybe maintainer(s) ?
> +to aid the development of Linux maintainers subsystem have trees where
> +they queue patches for the next kernel release. This is typically done
> +with a foo-next-2.6.git tree where foo would be an arbitrary subsystem
> +name. These trees typically are designed to have a clean git history
> +to make pulling for Linus easier and as clean as possible.
> +Subsystem maintainers can typically have their own development git trees
> +apart from the foo-next-2.6.git trees as a breeding ground and test ground
> +for bleeding edge patches. Subsystem maintainers are at complete freedom to
> +maintain these trees however they see fit. Once patches have been proven
> +stable enough in a development tree they tend to be moved to their
> +respective foo-next-2.6.git tree.
> +Subsystem development trees are *always* open for development and new patches
> +are always accepted. After a new kernel is released subsystem maintainers
> +tend to slow down in accepting patches into their development trees though
> +so that the new development can eventually be rebased easily ontop of the
> +next kernel rc1 release.
> +If your patch is adding a new feature or changing a lot of code and you send
> +it between a stable kernel release and prior to the rc1 kernel release it will
> +likely be a while before it is merged into a development tree, so be patient
> +during this time.
> +2.0.1: MERGE WINDOW
> +The merge window opens up after the next stable kernel is released and takes
> +two weeks. The merge window is when maintainers of different subsystems send
> +pull requests to Linus for code they have been queuing up for the next stable
> +kernel. These are the foo-next-2.6.git trees.
> +After the merge window the kernel is worked on through the rc-series of the
> +kernel release. The rc-series focus is to address regressions. The merge window
> +closes upon the first rc-series release, rc1.
> +After a subsystem maintainer has sent his pull request to Linus during the merge
> +window no further new development will be accepted for that foo-next-2.6.git
> +tree and as such it marks the closure of development for that subsystem for that
> +kernel cycle.
> +2.0.2: MEETING DEADLINES FOR KERNEL RELEASES
> +Developers wishing to target deadlines should simply work on their development
> +without regards or consideration for inclusion to a specific kernel release.
> +Once development is done it should simply be posted so the community can review it
> +and it can eventually be merged into the appropriate development subsystem tree.
> +If you insist on targeting a kernel release for deadlines you can try to be aware
> +of the current rc cycle development and how soon it seems the next stable kernel
> +release will be made.
> +A good indication of when the next stable kernel release will be made is when
> +Linus notes the last rc cycle released may be the last. By this time you
> +should already have all your development done and merged in the respective
> +development tree. If your code is not ready and merged into the respective
> +maintainers development tree prior to the announced last potential rc kernel
> +release chances are you missed getting your code in for the next kernel merge
> +window. Exemptions here are new drivers, covered below.
> +2.0.3: RC-SERIES RULES
> +This section summarizes what kind of patches are accepted after a new stable kernel is
> +released, before the merge window closes and after it closes. These patches are targeted
> +for the kernel prior to its final release.
> +18.104.22.168: RC-SERIES RULES PRIOR TO THE RC1 RELEASE
> +Before the merge window closes, prior to the rc1 release, Linus accepts pull requests
> +from different subsystem maintainers, with it go all the queued up material for the
> +next kernel release for each respective subsystem, on all foo-next-2.6.git trees.
> +After subsystem maintainers have sent their pull requests there are strict rules
> +for new patches prior to the close of the merge window, marked by the rc1 release:
> + - patches must fix a regression
> + - patches must fix a security hole
> + - patches must fix a oops/kernel hang
> +Non-intrusive bug fixes fixes will very likely not be accepted. Some maintainers
> +may choose to accept some non-intrusive patches, depending on their work load.
> +You should however not take it for granted such patches will get accepted. You
> +should always just target the development kernel and provide a good commit to
> +help with review.
> +When in doubt consult with your subsystem maintainer or just allow him to
> +do the judging of where the patches deserves to go to, an excellent commit log
> +should help with this effort.
> +22.214.171.124: RC-SERIES RULES AFTER THE RC1 RELEASE
> +Linus does not accept more pull requests from subsystem maintainers after the
> +rc1 release. This means you can expect no new features or new development after
> +The same type of patches are accepted after the rc1 release with the addition
> +of a slight warmer welcome for non-intrusive bug fix patches. Non-intrusive
> +bug fixes must be important and address very clearly the bug they are fixing.
> +Non-intrusive bug fixes can fix issues which are not a regression, security
> +hole or a kernel oops/hang.
> +Linus will not accept non-intrusive bug fix patches late in the rc-series, after
> +the rc5, for example.
> +You should never take it for granted non-intrusive bug fixes will be accepted.
> +Ultimately it is up to the subsystem maintainers to decide whether to accept
> +such a fix or not, which is why your commit log entry is critically important.
> +You want to provide as much detail as is posisible in order to help maintainers
You need to? Your should?
> +make the right call.
> +2.0.4 RC-SERIES NEW DRIVER EXEMPTION RULE
> +The very first release a new driver or filesystem is special. New drivers
> +are accepted during the rc-series! Patches for the same driver then are
> +also accepted during the same rc-series of a kernel as well as fixes for it
> +cannot regress as no previous kernels exists with it.
> +After a driver has been present for one kernel release the relaxed rules for
> +it during the rc-series are no longer applicable.
> 2.1: THE BIG PICTURE
> The kernel developers use a loosely time-based release process, with a new
> -major kernel release happening every two or three months. The recent
> -release history looks like this:
> - 2.6.26 July 13, 2008
> - 2.6.25 April 16, 2008
> - 2.6.24 January 24, 2008
> - 2.6.23 October 9, 2007
> - 2.6.22 July 8, 2007
> - 2.6.21 April 25, 2007
> - 2.6.20 February 4, 2007
> +major kernel release happening about every two or three months. The current
> +average time based on the last 10 releases is 86.0 days. The recent release
> +history along with the number of days between each release looks like this:
> + 2.6.30 June 10, 2009 - 78 days
> + 2.6.29 March 23, 2009 - 89 days
> + 2.6.28 December 29, 2008 - 76 days
> + 2.6.27 October 8, 2008 - 88 days
> + 2.6.26 July 13, 2008 - 88 days
> + 2.6.25 April 16, 2008 - 83 days
> + 2.6.24 January 24, 2008 - 108 days
> + 2.6.23 October 9, 2007 - 94 days
> + 2.6.22 July 8, 2007 - 75 days
> + 2.6.21 April 25, 2007 - 81 days
> + 2.6.20 February 4, 2007 - 68
> Every 2.6.x release is a major kernel release with new features, internal
> API changes, and more. A typical 2.6 release can contain over 10,000
> diff --git a/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt b/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
> index a452227..113e8c8 100644
> --- a/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
> @@ -1,5 +1,10 @@
> Everything you ever wanted to know about Linux 2.6 -stable releases.
> +For further details, such as stable kernel release schedules, rc-series
> +policies and process of development please refer to:
> Rules on what kind of patches are accepted, and which ones are not, into the
> "-stable" tree:
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/