Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Coping with the new-developer flood

Laurent Pinchart <[email protected]>
Newsgroups dev.linux.lists.ksummit
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Fri, Aug 07, 2026 at 11:20:39AM +0200, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
> On 07/08/2026 05:23, Theodore Tso wrote:
> > There are some few exceptions, where a fix can't be easily backported
> > to the LTS branch, and so a different way of fixing a particular
> > serious patch needs to be applied to the LTS branch.  But normally
> > this will be explicitly stated in the commit description, but we don't
> > do that in a structured way, so it might be hard for a non-LLM bot to
> > figure this out.
> 
> Good point, but instead of looking at the patch description, it might be
> enough to look at the header: an exception could be added for patches
> sent to the stable ML with a version in the prefix.
> 
> But back to the idea of checking if the patch can apply: it might not be
> easy to deal with all the different trees and branches. There might be
> some dependences that are still in review, or applied somewhere but not
> in linux-next yet, or conflicts with linux-next, etc.

This is an issue that isn't limited to newcomers. As a maintainer, I
sometimes don't know what I should apply a patch series on. We have the
base-commit and prerequisite-patch-id trailers added by b4 that help a
lot there, but not everybody uses them. If a mechanism that flags the
issue for newcomers could also ensure that every patch series carries
proper base information, that would be a very nice side effect. This may
include adding new trailers if some use cases are not currently covered.

> Plus note that
> Sashiko will generally complain if it cannot find where to apply it.

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.