Greg KH | fc185d9 | 2005-07-29 12:14:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 1 | Everything you ever wanted to know about Linux 2.6 -stable releases. |
| 2 | |
| 3 | Rules on what kind of patches are accepted, and what ones are not, into |
| 4 | the "-stable" tree: |
| 5 | |
| 6 | - It must be obviously correct and tested. |
| 7 | - It can not bigger than 100 lines, with context. |
| 8 | - It must fix only one thing. |
| 9 | - It must fix a real bug that bothers people (not a, "This could be a |
| 10 | problem..." type thing.) |
| 11 | - It must fix a problem that causes a build error (but not for things |
| 12 | marked CONFIG_BROKEN), an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real |
| 13 | security issue, or some "oh, that's not good" issue. In short, |
| 14 | something critical. |
| 15 | - No "theoretical race condition" issues, unless an explanation of how |
| 16 | the race can be exploited. |
| 17 | - It can not contain any "trivial" fixes in it (spelling changes, |
| 18 | whitespace cleanups, etc.) |
| 19 | - It must be accepted by the relevant subsystem maintainer. |
| 20 | - It must follow Documentation/SubmittingPatches rules. |
| 21 | |
| 22 | |
| 23 | Procedure for submitting patches to the -stable tree: |
| 24 | |
| 25 | - Send the patch, after verifying that it follows the above rules, to |
| 26 | stable@kernel.org. |
| 27 | - The sender will receive an ack when the patch has been accepted into |
| 28 | the queue, or a nak if the patch is rejected. This response might |
| 29 | take a few days, according to the developer's schedules. |
| 30 | - If accepted, the patch will be added to the -stable queue, for review |
| 31 | by other developers. |
| 32 | - Security patches should not be sent to this alias, but instead to the |
| 33 | documented security@kernel.org. |
| 34 | |
| 35 | |
| 36 | Review cycle: |
| 37 | |
| 38 | - When the -stable maintainers decide for a review cycle, the patches |
| 39 | will be sent to the review committee, and the maintainer of the |
| 40 | affected area of the patch (unless the submitter is the maintainer of |
| 41 | the area) and CC: to the linux-kernel mailing list. |
| 42 | - The review committee has 48 hours in which to ack or nak the patch. |
| 43 | - If the patch is rejected by a member of the committee, or linux-kernel |
| 44 | members object to the patch, bringing up issues that the maintainers |
| 45 | and members did not realize, the patch will be dropped from the |
| 46 | queue. |
| 47 | - At the end of the review cycle, the acked patches will be added to |
| 48 | the latest -stable release, and a new -stable release will happen. |
| 49 | - Security patches will be accepted into the -stable tree directly from |
| 50 | the security kernel team, and not go through the normal review cycle. |
| 51 | Contact the kernel security team for more details on this procedure. |
| 52 | |
| 53 | |
| 54 | Review committe: |
| 55 | |
| 56 | - This will be made up of a number of kernel developers who have |
| 57 | volunteered for this task, and a few that haven't. |
| 58 | |