On Jul 30, 2019, at 2:48 PM, Sasha Levin sashal@kernel.org wrote:
On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 01:42:45PM -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
Hi Sasha,
Hello!
On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 5:45 PM Sasha Levin sashal@kernel.org wrote:
Hi,
[This is an automated email]
Where did you get this patch from? Since stable needs patches merged
This bot grabs them from various mailing lists.
on Linus tree, shouldn't your scripts run to try backporting only patches from there?
There's a note a few lines down that says:
"NOTE: The patch will not be queued to stable trees until it is upstream."
Otherwise, no, there's no rule that says we can't look at patches before they are upstream. We can't queue them up, but we sure can poke them.
The reasoning behind this is that it's easier to get replies (and backports) from folks who are actively working on the patch now,
This is a very good reason indeed...
rather than a few weeks later when Greg sends his "FAILED:" mails and gets ignored because said folks have moved on.
however this could potentially cause extra work and confusion like we can see on this thread where the developer immediately responded to your email and sent the backported patch to the stable mailing list.
Maybe it is just because we are used to Greg's failed to apply email or maybe it was just a matter of education...
But I wonder if there isn't something that could be improved on the automated message here. Some message clearly stating:
- No action required at this point - you can work to prepare the backport in advance - don't send it to stable before requested by Greg
Anyway, just few ideas. I just reached you to understand the flow and I'm already happy to understand what happened here.
Thanks a lot for that, Rodrigo.
-- Thanks, Sasha _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx