patch tagging: UBUNTU and SAUCE

[Brad Figg]

On 01/25/2011 10:08 AM, Tim Gardner wrote:
> On 01/25/2011 10:29 AM, Kamal Mostafa wrote:
>> I still don't understand the patch tagging scheme for
>> kernel-team at lists.ubuntu.com submissions (because I am dense ;-) ...
>>
>> I submitted this one as an SRU to Lucid and Maverick. The patch was a
>> cherry-pick from mainline, but is not present in the 2.6.{32,35} stable
>> trees:
>>
>> UBUNTU: SAUCE: dell-laptop: Add another Dell laptop family to the DMI whitelist
>>
>>
>> Tim Gardner wrote:
>>> Its also not a SAUCE patch since its a cherry-pick from Linus' repo.
>>
>> Stefan Bader wrote:
>>> Hm, probably annoying nitpick but would we not completely take away the UBUNTU
>>> tag as well as it really is a cherry-pick from upstream?
>>
>>
>> I mistakenly thought that it should need UBUNTU: or SAUCE: (or
>> something) for Lucid and Maverick because it was not present ** in the
>> associated stable tree **. But should I never add UBUNTU: or SAUCE: to
>> *any* cherry-picked patch from *any* upstream tree? (or is it more
>> complicated than that?)
>>
>> When exactly should I add UBUNTU: or SAUCE: to a patch submission?
>>
>> What's the difference between UBUNTU: and SAUCE:?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> -Kamal
>>
>
> UBUNTU prefaces any commit that _we_ write that does not come from upstream. SAUCE is included in the description if its a code patch that we've either written that won't go upstream, or have included from a source other then upstream. Upstream in this
> case includes Linus' tree as well as any of the stable trees (which are composed solely of patches from Linus' tree anyways).
>
> Clear as mud?
>
> rtg

This page (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kernel/Dev/StablePatchFormat) attempts to anwer any/all such
questions. If it doesn't it should be fixed.

Brad
-- 
Brad Figg brad.figg at canonical.com http://www.canonical.com