Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 11:20:30 -0300
From: Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>
Cc: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>, Chris Wright <chrisw@osdl.org>,
       torvalds@osdl.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] -stable, how it's going to work.
Message-ID: <20050309142029.GC15110@logos.cnet>
References: <20050309072833.GA18878@kroah.com> <m1sm35w3am.fsf@muc.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <m1sm35w3am.fsf@muc.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 903
Lines: 20


> >  - Security patches will be accepted into the -stable tree directly from
> >    the security kernel team, and not go through the normal review cycle.
> >    Contact the kernel security team for more details on this procedure.
> 
> This also sounds like a bad rule. How come the security team has more
> competence to review patches than the subsystem maintainers?  I can
> see the point of overruling maintainers on security issues when they
> are not responsive, but if they are I think the should be still the
> main point of contact.

The security team is going to work with the subsystem maintainers,
not overrule them.

That would be indeed insane.
-
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/