Hi!
Let me ask my wife (who is happy using Linux as a regular desktop user) how comfortable she would be with triaging kernel bugs...
That's really up to the distribution, not the main kernel stable. Does she download and compile the kernels herself? Does she use LEDs?
The point is, stable is to keep what was working continued working. If we don't care about introducing a regression, and just want to keep regressions the same as mainline, why not just go to mainline? That way you can also get the new features? Mainline already has the mantra to not break user space. When I work on new features, I sometimes stumble on bugs with the current features. And some of those fixes require a rewrite. It was "good enough" before, but every so often could cause a bug that the new feature would trigger more often. Do we back port that rewrite? Do we backport fixes to old code that are more likely to be triggered by new features?
Ideally, we should be working on getting to no regressions to stable.
This is exactly what we're doing.
If a fix for a bug in -stable introduces a different regression, should we take it or not?
If a fix for bug introduces regression, would you call it "obviously correct"?
Pavel