| |||||||||||||
2.6.32.9 Release notes2.6.32.9 Release notesPosted Feb 21, 2010 21:11 UTC (Sun) by neilbrown (subscriber, #359)Parent article: 2.6.32.9 Release notes
Maybe here is a case for the "Impact" tag that was discussed some time ago. Then you could generate this report automatically be combining the Subject and Impact....
(Log in to post comments)
Impact Posted Feb 21, 2010 21:22 UTC (Sun) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link] That, of course, would require that developers truly understand the impact of their fixes. Maybe someday we'll all be sufficiently aware to write lines like:
Impact: Stop turning machines into botnet fodder
Most of us, though, just think "it fixed another bug."
Impact Posted Feb 21, 2010 22:18 UTC (Sun) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]
Git notes might help here, by allowing Impact: lines to be adjusted
after-the-fact.
Impact Posted Feb 22, 2010 5:10 UTC (Mon) by neilbrown (subscriber, #359) [Link]
In the present context, we only really need "impact" for something that is going in to -stable. When it goes into -stable it is a new commit and so the commit message can be adjusted then.
When a patch is being submitted the -stable, the submitter presumably can justify the request for the patch to go into stable. If that justification were written is clear succinct text (the hard part!) and placed in an 'Impact:' line, then these release notes would be already written.
|
|||||||||||||