Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755081Ab3JRBao (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Oct 2013 21:30:44 -0400 Received: from shadbolt.e.decadent.org.uk ([88.96.1.126]:58640 "EHLO shadbolt.e.decadent.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754496Ab3JRBal (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Oct 2013 21:30:41 -0400 Message-ID: <1382059831.2794.18.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk> Subject: Re: [ 3.8.y.z extended stable ] Linux 3.8.13.11 stable review From: Ben Hutchings To: Bjorn Helgaas Cc: Kamal Mostafa , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "stable@vger.kernel.org" , kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com, Greg Kroah-Hartman , Luis Henriques Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 02:30:31 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: <1381419752-29733-1-git-send-email-kamal@canonical.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-ygFl47AUzDrW4ZcJ/aRK" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.8.5-2 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 192.168.4.101 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ben@decadent.org.uk X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shadbolt.decadent.org.uk); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2774 Lines: 72 --=-ygFl47AUzDrW4ZcJ/aRK Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 2013-10-10 at 11:37 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Kamal Mostafa wrot= e: > > This is the start of the review cycle for the Linux 3.8.13.11 stable ke= rnel. >=20 > Would anybody be interested in adding some sort of "stable" tag to the > subject lines of stable backport patches, e.g., instead of: >=20 > [PATCH 001/104] htb: fix sign extension bug >=20 > something like: >=20 > [STABLE 3.8.13.11 001/104] htb: fix sign extension bug >=20 > I don't mind having the stable patches on LKML, but it would be nice > if it were easier to distinguish stable backports from new patches. I > know the patches are nicely threaded behind this message, but some > readers don't really pay attention to that. I agree that some distinction is needed, but I'm not convinced about that precise format. I don't think it's worth including version components after the stable base version e.g. 3.2. And I think that including the version is a big enough clue that this is for a stable branch and not mainline. So I've changed my review script to put a subject prefix of 'PATCH 3.2' before the patch number (and similarly in the cover letter). But if there's consensus that a more explicit tag is wanted then I'll follow that. Ben. --=20 Ben Hutchings Horngren's Observation: Among economists, the real world is often a special case= . --=-ygFl47AUzDrW4ZcJ/aRK Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux) iQIVAwUAUmCPN+e/yOyVhhEJAQry/w//WpRCUFuAIlxSNPxqlg+O7kAqG0dNz+DP fP6rjEgvnDplTyWwQvGsASUKIARZrjGbTfK5kTRd+UyrT+WhGPWwoPOwxucpwGgD ieU2dT4hsTcbJdC7HMBP9fKPtw94oqjTKByuLQkgXh+r7rtJCqWxVNtJJIjUcLWZ IxxquQpFABOjs2+NqgsU2iUMC8UidDul3n46K3QAlgr7O1J7JOsqDmM7JR/1ur2n 37m3KCWXJYtvWjzeHf4i4fq7YAvskwTZuh9JRenSDekOTTyJQK6SQI4eG4V+vYhV gB8iRclfIWxjuU4FF7n5CLk+lCcXSXVGN45kMWdPkvjJxcAtilzYYkBQ0fPndRB9 jTWN23t/Heo7smbVHso93epv6s+yY3YC+7q01e7oIdAPO27nkBxQpNx4GNk/0/hv VWrloIAP1AtV19/rVpwqpw8Iu/mw4gbRXYq2fFfMC8Pw0YQOB5EjAf6MRc89G/+Q q2C78jcqAyyYUduAfrNh6Iaz9cICqlflinMDe8fZJb5oe0PNO93fTg1IfHkHgSKQ gFjsrhph3l2YYf56BO6DWbsmnByvN4YqdtrCdt2SyBquWoufyL+eewDr/gbbp9Dt 7TzPcV8xSKFye47ktHzfWUHFrQ4EzqrzCHGpfPDB+tOjWGuyJR6vByPh5xoTz5ut 9owo4VZ7/Qw= =EVZb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-ygFl47AUzDrW4ZcJ/aRK-- -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/