59 lines
2.5 KiB
Text
59 lines
2.5 KiB
Text
|
Everything you ever wanted to know about Linux 2.6 -stable releases.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Rules on what kind of patches are accepted, and what ones are not, into
|
||
|
|
the "-stable" tree:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
- It must be obviously correct and tested.
|
||
|
|
- It can not bigger than 100 lines, with context.
|
||
|
|
- It must fix only one thing.
|
||
|
|
- It must fix a real bug that bothers people (not a, "This could be a
|
||
|
|
problem..." type thing.)
|
||
|
|
- It must fix a problem that causes a build error (but not for things
|
||
|
|
marked CONFIG_BROKEN), an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real
|
||
|
|
security issue, or some "oh, that's not good" issue. In short,
|
||
|
|
something critical.
|
||
|
|
- No "theoretical race condition" issues, unless an explanation of how
|
||
|
|
the race can be exploited.
|
||
|
|
- It can not contain any "trivial" fixes in it (spelling changes,
|
||
|
|
whitespace cleanups, etc.)
|
||
|
|
- It must be accepted by the relevant subsystem maintainer.
|
||
|
|
- It must follow Documentation/SubmittingPatches rules.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Procedure for submitting patches to the -stable tree:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
- Send the patch, after verifying that it follows the above rules, to
|
||
|
|
stable@kernel.org.
|
||
|
|
- The sender will receive an ack when the patch has been accepted into
|
||
|
|
the queue, or a nak if the patch is rejected. This response might
|
||
|
|
take a few days, according to the developer's schedules.
|
||
|
|
- If accepted, the patch will be added to the -stable queue, for review
|
||
|
|
by other developers.
|
||
|
|
- Security patches should not be sent to this alias, but instead to the
|
||
|
|
documented security@kernel.org.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Review cycle:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
- When the -stable maintainers decide for a review cycle, the patches
|
||
|
|
will be sent to the review committee, and the maintainer of the
|
||
|
|
affected area of the patch (unless the submitter is the maintainer of
|
||
|
|
the area) and CC: to the linux-kernel mailing list.
|
||
|
|
- The review committee has 48 hours in which to ack or nak the patch.
|
||
|
|
- If the patch is rejected by a member of the committee, or linux-kernel
|
||
|
|
members object to the patch, bringing up issues that the maintainers
|
||
|
|
and members did not realize, the patch will be dropped from the
|
||
|
|
queue.
|
||
|
|
- At the end of the review cycle, the acked patches will be added to
|
||
|
|
the latest -stable release, and a new -stable release will happen.
|
||
|
|
- 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.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Review committe:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
- This will be made up of a number of kernel developers who have
|
||
|
|
volunteered for this task, and a few that haven't.
|
||
|
|
|