On 2019-11-20 08:49:23 -0600 (-0600), Ben Nemec wrote: [...]
Even if something merges, it still has to be proposed for release, at which point the release liaison or PTL should be looking at it, and then once the release is proposed the release team is going to look at the changes included. So there is a safety net if a reviewer makes a mistake.
True in principle, but we've basically always treated stable branches as a place from which downstream consumers can consume patches, and the stable point releases on them are more of a formality. I may simply not be connected with the right segments of our community, but I haven't heard anyone say they specifically wait to consume stable branch point releases vs just taking the branch content at a random point in time or selectively picking relevant patches out of it to incorporate into a packaged version... and even the theoretical stable point release reviewer safety net vaporizes for branches which pass into extended maintenance mode. However, the above should not be taken as an objection on my part for the plan. I agree the real safety net here is the users, and the lessons a reviewer learns after helping a panicked user of their software work around a regression or behavior change which should never have been allowed to merge on a stable branch in the first place. Failure is the best teacher. -- Jeremy Stanley