Re: AUTOSEL process

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > So to summarize, that buggy commit was backported even though:
> > 
> >   * There were no indications that it was a bug fix (and thus potentially
> >     suitable for stable) in the first place.
> >   * On the AUTOSEL thread, someone told you the commit is broken.
> >   * There was already a thread that reported a regression caused by the commit.
> >     Easily findable via lore search.
> >   * There was also already a pending patch that Fixes the commit.  Again easily
> >     findable via lore search.
> > 
> > So it seems a *lot* of things went wrong, no?  Why?  If so many things can go
> > wrong, it's not just a "mistake" but rather the process is the problem...
> 
> BTW, another cause of this is that the commit (66f99628eb24) was AUTOSEL'd after
> only being in mainline for 4 days, and *released* in all LTS kernels after only
> being in mainline for 12 days.  Surely that's a timeline befitting a critical
> security vulnerability, not some random neural-network-selected commit that
> wasn't even fixing anything?

I see this problem, too, "-stable" is more experimental than Linus's
releases.

I believe that -stable would be more useful without AUTOSEL process.

Best regards,
									Pavel
-- 
People of Russia, stop Putin before his war on Ukraine escalates.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature