From patchwork Tue May 14 15:07:27 2019 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Stephen Finucane X-Patchwork-Id: 1099547 Return-Path: X-Original-To: incoming@patchwork.ozlabs.org Delivered-To: patchwork-incoming@bilbo.ozlabs.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 453Ldx43k5z9sCJ for ; Wed, 15 May 2019 01:07:49 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=that.guru Authentication-Results: ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="key not found in DNS" (0-bit key; unprotected) header.d=that.guru header.i=@that.guru header.b="IUBu957M"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 453Ldw3PsYzDqHr for ; Wed, 15 May 2019 01:07:48 +1000 (AEST) X-Original-To: patchwork@lists.ozlabs.org Delivered-To: patchwork@lists.ozlabs.org Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=none (mailfrom) smtp.mailfrom=that.guru (client-ip=199.181.239.172; helo=relay0172.mxlogin.com; envelope-from=stephen@that.guru; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=that.guru Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="key not found in DNS" (0-bit key; unprotected) header.d=that.guru header.i=@that.guru header.b="IUBu957M"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from relay0172.mxlogin.com (relay0172.mxlogin.com [199.181.239.172]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 453Ldn5BGrzDq99 for ; Wed, 15 May 2019 01:07:41 +1000 (AEST) Received: from filter001.mxrelay.co (unknown [94.130.183.33]) by relay0172.mxlogin.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F8A2CC6031C; Tue, 14 May 2019 10:07:38 -0500 (CDT) Received: from one.mxroute.com (one.mxroute.com [195.201.59.211]) by filter001.mxrelay.co (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D08D8100A0E; Tue, 14 May 2019 15:07:36 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=that.guru; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version:Message-Id:Date:Subject: Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To:References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=20MeovkHNYACEGdhJgwKbfh5cglkrxI5Os2mzGTDGkY=; b=IUBu957Mzja3jHHwIpD3c7FjRz r4ASndJCf9omuHg+X8CmfF7naFDM/R7MXzrGrfZ8wMQbZz0DYqPf6Pl8xDJYyGwjSaIqh+6cPfu1p G8sz2MyJbPoN0k1mTiLLNKflcR+BNoU2H6BoUA7zBnyOZ67sbvTrDY3mDMI4M3tApfR1rs6jYQn4u eXUusP0MU52ClOaLV/FKB/ZBNenYA2Pqxedu3QQa91UmgUJn7ahbe0aW2dW7VeeHvuGyhbxb/Ju4d bncWseWbh83EbzeQQTZxidZLraJJ1OKizQXwBfR++B1KRmRh/IqjhXONXuRxjYtxr+WhcKeQCL5Wi kuwq3Gww==; From: Stephen Finucane To: patchwork@lists.ozlabs.org Subject: [PATCH] docs: Document backport criteria Date: Tue, 14 May 2019 16:07:27 +0100 Message-Id: <20190514150727.15840-1-stephen@that.guru> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.21.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-AuthUser: stephen@that.guru X-BeenThere: patchwork@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Patchwork development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: patchwork-bounces+incoming=patchwork.ozlabs.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Patchwork" Explain why we don't want to be in the business of backport certain patches, in the long run. It took me a while to put this into words but I was helped by a similar discussion ongoing in the OpenStack community at the moment [1]. [1] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-May/006220.html Signed-off-by: Stephen Finucane Cc: Daniel Axtens Acked-by: Daniel Axtens --- docs/development/releasing.rst | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+) diff --git a/docs/development/releasing.rst b/docs/development/releasing.rst index 86cacb3a..8bb6b314 100644 --- a/docs/development/releasing.rst +++ b/docs/development/releasing.rst @@ -115,3 +115,30 @@ when committing:: When enough patches have been backported, you should release a new **PATCH** release. + +Backport criteria +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ + +We consider bug fixes and security updates to the Patchwork code itself valid +for backporting, along with fixes to documentation and developer tooling. We do +not, however, consider the following backportable: + +Features + Backporting features is complicated and introduces instability in what is + supposed to be stable release. If new features are required, users should + update their Patchwork version. + +API changes + Except for bug fixes that resolve 5xx-class errors or fix security issues. + This also applies to API versions. + +Requirement changes + Requirements on a stable branch are provided as a "snapshot in time" and, as + with features, should not change so as to prevent instability being introduced + in a stable branch. In addition, stable requirements are not a mechanism to + alert users to security vulnerabilities and should not be considered as such. + Users of stable branches should either rely on distro-provided dependencies, + which generally maintain a snapshot-in-time fork of packages and selectively + backport fixes to them, or manage dependencies manually. In cases, where using + a distro-provided package necessitates minor changes to the Patchwork code, + these can be discussed on a case-by-case basis.