|  | Everything you ever wanted to know about Linux 2.6 -stable releases. | 
|  |  | 
|  | Rules on what kind of patches are accepted, and what ones are not, into | 
|  | the "-stable" tree: | 
|  |  | 
|  | - It must be obviously correct and tested. | 
|  | - It can not bigger than 100 lines, with context. | 
|  | - It must fix only one thing. | 
|  | - It must fix a real bug that bothers people (not a, "This could be a | 
|  | problem..." type thing.) | 
|  | - It must fix a problem that causes a build error (but not for things | 
|  | marked CONFIG_BROKEN), an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real | 
|  | security issue, or some "oh, that's not good" issue.  In short, | 
|  | something critical. | 
|  | - No "theoretical race condition" issues, unless an explanation of how | 
|  | the race can be exploited. | 
|  | - It can not contain any "trivial" fixes in it (spelling changes, | 
|  | whitespace cleanups, etc.) | 
|  | - It must be accepted by the relevant subsystem maintainer. | 
|  | - It must follow Documentation/SubmittingPatches rules. | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  | Procedure for submitting patches to the -stable tree: | 
|  |  | 
|  | - Send the patch, after verifying that it follows the above rules, to | 
|  | stable@kernel.org. | 
|  | - The sender will receive an ack when the patch has been accepted into | 
|  | the queue, or a nak if the patch is rejected.  This response might | 
|  | take a few days, according to the developer's schedules. | 
|  | - If accepted, the patch will be added to the -stable queue, for review | 
|  | by other developers. | 
|  | - Security patches should not be sent to this alias, but instead to the | 
|  | documented security@kernel.org. | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  | Review cycle: | 
|  |  | 
|  | - When the -stable maintainers decide for a review cycle, the patches | 
|  | will be sent to the review committee, and the maintainer of the | 
|  | affected area of the patch (unless the submitter is the maintainer of | 
|  | the area) and CC: to the linux-kernel mailing list. | 
|  | - The review committee has 48 hours in which to ack or nak the patch. | 
|  | - If the patch is rejected by a member of the committee, or linux-kernel | 
|  | members object to the patch, bringing up issues that the maintainers | 
|  | and members did not realize, the patch will be dropped from the | 
|  | queue. | 
|  | - At the end of the review cycle, the acked patches will be added to | 
|  | the latest -stable release, and a new -stable release will happen. | 
|  | - Security patches will be accepted into the -stable tree directly from | 
|  | the security kernel team, and not go through the normal review cycle. | 
|  | Contact the kernel security team for more details on this procedure. | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  | Review committe: | 
|  |  | 
|  | - This will be made up of a number of kernel developers who have | 
|  | volunteered for this task, and a few that haven't. | 
|  |  |