On Sun 2018-07-15 10:54:03, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 07:38:12PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Hi!
> > 
> > > > The way I see it, if a commit can get one or two tested-by, it's a good
> > > > alternative to a week in -next.
> > > 
> 
> Pavel, I "love" how you fail to point out that you are responding to a 2
> month old thread :(
> 
> And that thread was beaten to death, and still you want to revise it,
> which is odd to me, perhaps you just don't like stable releases?  Given
> that you never mark any of the patches for your subsystem for stable
> releases, why do you care about how they are maintained?

I do mark patches -- acording to stable kernel rules. But you are
apparently using different rules, not written anywhere, and I get
complains when I don't mark patches according to _those_.

But this was supposed to be about testing.

And I'd like to see Tested: no/compile headers, instead.

[And yes, motivation for this was that broken LED patches were merged
to stable without any testing, and when that was questioned, I was
told that testing was not performed because it would require unusual
hardware called "USB keyboard".]

									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html