From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from ms.lwn.net (ms.lwn.net [45.79.88.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A19592F26 for ; Tue, 1 Feb 2022 23:13:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2601:281:8300:104d::5f6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 71DFC6110; Tue, 1 Feb 2022 23:13:04 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 ms.lwn.net 71DFC6110 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lwn.net; s=20201203; t=1643757184; bh=UYAYefe+zvDOAsHHZ3G5fCXex2xO7DIMn5C0bv2jW9A=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=I9rhyHVsD1dKPF/ryDE/awYMpadTa8l/Jvq6DRSEI5hEwd1blur11tJuYVIiKYNSC Y6wRhfEgqxeRdY4l9iPO4Dm5QDjp3ihd08OJ0qya9f+2MGr0Sd7W2rBGAxmg4EF5SK xImRT0LI5Nhq+9lvkmFiJo69ULZax/HYisyj4MLknbuAsEEu0YSHAvXNELFQZs0F7u mwjt1E1EoVa0pjWd2n+XoM7BGqhSpoUyQOCIDf/jQDNoclu+t6wcgQFQlZ6ST7y95F 8smIqbEJZCApckwTqd13JQKH0HWKTIImNWVOqOS+O63UPE7ktRcFDietBWSTL2X94U e8SgBFHsdQzDA== From: Jonathan Corbet To: Thorsten Leemhuis , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds Cc: workflows@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , Randy Dunlap , regressions@lists.linux.dev, Greg Kroah-Hartman , Lukas Bulwahn Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] docs: add two documents about regression handling In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2022 16:13:37 -0700 Message-ID: <87k0ee5gf2.fsf@meer.lwn.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: regressions@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain OK, I'll try not to take so long to have a look at it this time. Thorsten Leemhuis writes: > Create two documents explaining various aspects around regression > handling and tracking; one is aimed at users, the other targets > developers. > > The texts among others describe the first rule of Linux kernel > development and what it means in practice. They also explain what a > regression actually is and how to report one properly. > > Both texts additionally provide a brief introduction to the bot the > kernel's regression tracker uses to facilitate the work, but mention the > use is optional. > > To sum things up, provide a few quotes from Linus in the document for > developers to show how serious he takes regressions. > > Signed-off-by: Thorsten Leemhuis > --- > Documentation/admin-guide/index.rst | 1 + > .../admin-guide/regressions-users.rst | 436 ++++++++++++ > Documentation/process/index.rst | 1 + > Documentation/process/regressions-devs.rst | 672 ++++++++++++++++++ I'll start with some *serious* bikesheddery...it's best if the names of the files tell readers what's inside. This isn't something I feel really strongly about, but we could consider admin-guide/reporting-regressions.txt (or just regressions.txt) process/regression-policy.txt > MAINTAINERS | 2 + > 5 files changed, 1112 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 Documentation/admin-guide/regressions-users.rst > create mode 100644 Documentation/process/regressions-devs.rst > [...] > +Send a mail to the regressions mailing list (regressions@lists.linux.dev) while > +CCing the Linux kernel's regression tracker (regressions@leemhuis.info); if the > +issue might better be dealt with in private, feel free to omit the list. Perhaps a separate concern, but might you want to set up an @kernel.org alias for the regression tracker? Trust me, you're not gonna want to run it forever, and the ability to quickly redirect the mail may prove to be a nice thing to have. An email address with your domain sitting in the docs will circulate for years after it gets changed. > + > +Additional details about regressions > +------------------------------------ > + > + > +What is the goal of the "no regressions rule"? > +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > + > +Users should feel safe when updating kernel versions and not have to worry > +something might break. This is in the interest of the kernel developers to make > +updating attractive: they don't want users to stay on stable or longterm Linux > +series that are either abandoned or more than one and a half years old. That's > +in everybody's interest, as `those series might have known bugs, security > +issues, or other problematic aspects already fixed in later versions > +`_. > +Additionally, the kernel developers want to make it simple and appealing for > +users to test the latest pre-release or regular release. That's also in > +everybody's interest, as it's a lot easier to track down and fix problems, if > +they are reported shortly after being introduced. > + > +Is the "no regressions" rule really adhered in practice? > +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > + > +It's taken really serious, as can be seen by many mailing list posts from Linux serious*ly* Otherwise I can't find a lot to complain about at this point. I'm not really convinced that we need all those Quotations From Chairman Linus, but I won't fight about it either :) In general, though, unless objections show up, I don't see any real reason to not apply this one. Thanks, jon