Re: Please create the email alias do-not-apply-to-stable@xxxxxxxxxx -> /dev/null

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

On 17.04.24 15:38, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 03:21:12PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> On 17.04.24 14:52, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:
>>> On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 09:48:18AM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>>>> Could you please create the email alias
>>>> do-not-apply-to-stable@xxxxxxxxxx which redirects all mail to /dev/null,
>>>> just like stable@xxxxxxxxxx does?
>>>>
>>>> To quote:
>>>>
>>>>> How about:
>>>>> 	cc: <do-not-apply-to-stable@xxxxxxxxxx> # Reason goes here, and must be present
>>>>>
>>>>> and we can make that address be routed to /dev/null just like
>>>>> <stable@xxxxxxxxxx> is?
>>
>> FWIW, we could go back to what I initially proposed: use the existing
>> stable tag with a pre-defined comment to mark patches that AUTOSEL et.
>> al. should not pick up:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/c0a08b160b286e8c98549eedb37404c6e784cf8a.1712812895.git.linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> 
> If you can pick a better string, possibly, yes.

What did you think of Konstantin's

Cc: stable+noautosel@xxxxxxxxxx # Reason

That looked like a good solution -- and I wondered why I did not come up
with that idea myself. Sure, "autosel" would also imply/mean "the
scripts/tools that look out for Fixes: tags", but does that matter?

> But in the end, your proposal seems to imply:
> 
> 	cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxx	# Psych!  Just kidding, never backport this!
> 
> but really, that's just mean, and again, this is a VERY rare case you
> are trying to automate here. We have MUCH better and simpler ways for> maintainers to not have their subsystems scanned for stuff like this,
> why are we spending all of our time on this topic?

It started with various minor reasons -- and after some "this would be
nice to have" feedback it felt wrong to give up. It also looked like we
had some agreement already before a new discussion began.

Ciao, Thorsten