[Mesa-dev] Stable release process

[Marek Olšák]

I think that if people add the Cc stable tag to patches that are going
to land in master first, they shouldn't send it to the stable ML,
because that is redundant. Yet, many people do that. I would go even
further and say that any unreviewed patches shouldn't be sent to the
stable ML. At least that would be my policy I were the release
manager.

I don't know how Emil manages that ML, but I guess it's not fun.

Marek


On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 11:31 PM, Matt Turner <mattst88 at gmail.com> wrote:
> A long time ago, patch authors were tasked with cherry-picking their
> patches to stable branches. Today we Cc
> mesa-stable at lists.freedesktop.org and Emil rebases those patches onto
> stable. Cc'ing the list happens even on patches sent for their first
> review that are ultimately rejected, creating a lot of noise (and
> presumably makes the mailing list less useful).
>
> Initial questions:
>
> Is the mesa-stable@ mailing list useful (other than as a tag in a
> committed patch)?
>
> What do "nominated" and "queued" in the stable release candidate
> announcements actually mean?
>
> Should driver maintainers cherry-pick patches to stable on their own?
>
> Regardless of the outcome of that question, I think we would the
> process would be more transparent and predictable if patches were
> incorporated into the branch over time rather than all at once a few
> days before the release.
> _______________________________________________
> mesa-dev mailing list
> mesa-dev at lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev