Jay Cliburn wrote:
quoted text
> On Sun, 08 Jun 2008 07:10:51 -0700 (PDT)
> David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
> 
> 
>> If you ask me in the future about the status of a -stable
>> patch from the networking, I'll let you know exactly what
>> is happening to that patch wrt. stable.  I rarely forget
>> to submit an appropriate patch, and when I do forget you
>> merely have to let me know (rather than submitting it
>> to -stable directly, please don't do that) so that I can
>> fit it in with what I plan to submit to -stable already.
> 
> 
> As a netdev driver maintainer, I've been following this workflow for
> patches that need to go to -stable:
> 
> 1.  I submit a mainline patch to Jeff Garzik.
> 2.  Jeff submits to David.
> 3.  David submits to Linus.
> 4.  Linus merges patch into mainline.
> 5.  I extract mainline commit ID.
> 6.  I apply and test patch against appropriate 2.6.x.y git tree.
> 7.  I submit patch directly to -stable.
> 
> David's admonition tells me I'm doing it wrong, and that I should
> submit the stable patch to Jeff as well.  Am I right?

I usually encourage a more-parallel process where you simply email 
stable@kernel.org with the upstream commit id of the change(s) in question.

	Jeff



--
unsubscribe notice
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/