Updated new SRU policy spec
stefan.bader at canonical.com
Mon Jun 15 09:25:15 BST 2009
Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 10:39 AM, Stefan Bader<stefan.bader at canonical.com> wrote:
>> I updated the spec about our new SRU policy on
>> from my understanding of the outcome of the discussion. If this looks good I
>> would go forward and update out wiki page with that.
> Few questions, some silly, some not that silly:
> * What is SRU?
> * What are "OMG kitten killer bugs" ? :)
Tim's answer is speaking well enough. :)
> * Can a requirement be that patches must first have an equivalent
> upstream SHA1 sum on the stable kernel and mention that in the commit
> log entry? If the concerns is that the patches may take a while to
> trickle down the stable kernels then how about volunteering someone to
> join the stable kernel patch review cycle and help with that process?
I think we should get into the review cycle as well. It depends a bit on time
and man power. Do you have details on how to get into these?
> * If for whatever reason the above is not possible ensure that at
> least the patch has been posted and refer to URL for the patch in the
> commit log entry.
For the majority of patches they must be upstream. Exemptions likely will be
rare but (beside of internal build stuff) the requirement of a posting URL
sounds reasonable. This will at least make sure things are not "forgotten".
More information about the kernel-team