On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 7:09 AM Christian Brauner [off-list ref] wrote:

On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 04:05:53PM -0500, Paul Moore wrote:

quoted

Now back to the merge into the VFS tree ... I was very surprised to
open this patchset and see that Christian had merged v5 after less
than 24 hours (at least according to the email timestamps that I see)
and without an explicit ACK for the SELinux changes.  I've mentioned
this to you before Christian, please do not merge any SELinux, LSM
framework, or audit related patches without an explicit ACK.  I

Things go into the tree for testing when the VFS side is ready for
testing. We're at v5 and the patchset has gone through four iterations
over multiple months. It will go into linux-next and fs-next now for as
much expsure as possible.

I'm not sure what the confusion between merging things into a tree and
sending things upstream is. I have explained this to you before. The
application message is also pretty clear about that.

I'm not sure what the confusion is around my explicit request that you
refrain from merging anything that touches the LSM framework, SELinux,
or the audit subsystem without an explicit ACK.  I have explained this
to you before.

For the record, your application/merge email makes no statement about
only sending patches to Linus that have been ACK'd by all relevant
parties.  The only statement I can see in your email that remotely
relates to ACKs is this:

  "It's encouraged to provide Acked-bys and Reviewed-bys
   even though the patch has now been applied. If possible
   patch trailers will be updated."

... which once again makes no claims about holding back changes that
have not been properly ACK'd.

-- 
paul-moore.com