linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] docs: add two documents about regression handling

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 2 Feb 2022 11:05:38 +0100
From:   Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>
To:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     workflows@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        regressions@...ts.linux.dev,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] docs: add two documents about regression handling

On 02.02.22 00:13, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> OK, I'll try not to take so long to have a look at it this time.
> 
> Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info> 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 <linux@...mhuis.info>
>> ---
>>  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

I wasn't totally happy with the file names myself, so it's good that you
bring it up.

> 	admin-guide/reporting-regressions.txt (or just regressions.txt)
>         process/regression-policy.txt

I like "reporting-regressions.txt", but I wonder if using the word
"policy" is a good idea. I tried to avoid it (and similar words, like
guidelines), as they might do more harm then good. So how about:

 	admin-guide/reporting-regressions.rst
        process/regressions.rst

> [...] 
>> +Send a mail to the regressions mailing list (regressions@...ts.linux.dev) while
>> +CCing the Linux kernel's regression tracker (regressions@...mhuis.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.

Yeah, it's on my mental to do list for a few weeks already, but never
set down to actually get this rolling. You are right, I'll ask for an alias.

>> +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*

Fixed.

> 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 :)

I'll take a look again and consider kicking a few.

> In general, though, unless objections show up, I don't see any real
> reason to not apply this one.

Great, many thx!

Ciao, Thorsten