Re: [RFC] new -stable tag variant, Git workflow question

[Stefan Richter]

James Bottomley wrote:
[...]
>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 04:48:31AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> > FYI, today i committed a scheduler performance fix that has a number of 
>> > commit prerequisites for -stable integration. Those commits are not 
>> > marked -stable.
[...]
>> > we can move this into the Git commit space too, and minimize the 
>> > work for the -stable team, via a new -stable tag variant.
[...]
> The question is, how important is this?
> 
> One of the assumptions behind the current setup is that I assume
> backports are independent (so the order of transmission doesn't matter
> that much).  This isn't always true, but the exceptions tend to get
> handled manually.  Part of what the above is requesting is an
> implementation that starts to care about ordering.

More importantly, isn't this against the character of the -stable kernel
branches as _safe and simple_ hotfix branches?

If a fix has a number of prerequisites which ar not -stable fixes
themselves, then it is more than a hint that this fix is not really well
suited for -stable.
-- 
Stefan Richter
-=====-==--= =-== -=-=-
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
--
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/