docs-rst: add documents to development-process

Add several documents to the development-process ReST book.

As we don't want renames, use symlinks instead, keeping those
documents on their original place.

Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@s-opensource.com>

1 files changed, 0 insertions, 181 deletions

diff --git a/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt b/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
deleted file mode 100644
index 4d82e31b7958..000000000000
--- a/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,181 +0,0 @@
-.. _stable_kernel_rules:
-
-Everything you ever wanted to know about Linux -stable releases
-===============================================================
-
-Rules on what kind of patches are accepted, and which ones are not, into the
-"-stable" tree:
-
- - It must be obviously correct and tested.
- - It cannot be bigger than 100 lines, with context.
- - It must fix only one thing.
- - It must fix a real bug that bothers people (not a, "This could be a
-   problem..." type thing).
- - It must fix a problem that causes a build error (but not for things
-   marked CONFIG_BROKEN), an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real
-   security issue, or some "oh, that's not good" issue.  In short, something
-   critical.
- - Serious issues as reported by a user of a distribution kernel may also
-   be considered if they fix a notable performance or interactivity issue.
-   As these fixes are not as obvious and have a higher risk of a subtle
-   regression they should only be submitted by a distribution kernel
-   maintainer and include an addendum linking to a bugzilla entry if it
-   exists and additional information on the user-visible impact.
- - New device IDs and quirks are also accepted.
- - No "theoretical race condition" issues, unless an explanation of how the
-   race can be exploited is also provided.
- - It cannot contain any "trivial" fixes in it (spelling changes,
-   whitespace cleanups, etc).
- - It must follow the
-   :ref:`Documentation/SubmittingPatches <submittingpatches>`
-   rules.
- - It or an equivalent fix must already exist in Linus' tree (upstream).
-
-
-Procedure for submitting patches to the -stable tree
-----------------------------------------------------
-
- - If the patch covers files in net/ or drivers/net please follow netdev stable
-   submission guidelines as described in
-   Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.txt
- - Security patches should not be handled (solely) by the -stable review
-   process but should follow the procedures in
-   :ref:`Documentation/SecurityBugs <securitybugs>`.
-
-For all other submissions, choose one of the following procedures
------------------------------------------------------------------
-
-.. _option_1:
-
-Option 1
-********
-
-To have the patch automatically included in the stable tree, add the tag
-
-.. code-block:: none
-
-     Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
-
-in the sign-off area. Once the patch is merged it will be applied to
-the stable tree without anything else needing to be done by the author
-or subsystem maintainer.
-
-.. _option_2:
-
-Option 2
-********
-
-After the patch has been merged to Linus' tree, send an email to
-stable@vger.kernel.org containing the subject of the patch, the commit ID,
-why you think it should be applied, and what kernel version you wish it to
-be applied to.
-
-.. _option_3:
-
-Option 3
-********
-
-Send the patch, after verifying that it follows the above rules, to
-stable@vger.kernel.org.  You must note the upstream commit ID in the
-changelog of your submission, as well as the kernel version you wish
-it to be applied to.
-
-:ref:`option_1` is **strongly** preferred, is the easiest and most common.
-:ref:`option_2` and :ref:`option_3` are more useful if the patch isn't deemed
-worthy at the time it is applied to a public git tree (for instance, because
-it deserves more regression testing first).  :ref:`option_3` is especially
-useful if the patch needs some special handling to apply to an older kernel
-(e.g., if API's have changed in the meantime).
-
-Note that for :ref:`option_3`, if the patch deviates from the original
-upstream patch (for example because it had to be backported) this must be very
-clearly documented and justified in the patch description.
-
-The upstream commit ID must be specified with a separate line above the commit
-text, like this:
-
-.. code-block:: none
-
-    commit <sha1> upstream.
-
-Additionally, some patches submitted via Option 1 may have additional patch
-prerequisites which can be cherry-picked. This can be specified in the following
-format in the sign-off area:
-
-.. code-block:: none
-
-     Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x: a1f84a3: sched: Check for idle
-     Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x: 1b9508f: sched: Rate-limit newidle
-     Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x: fd21073: sched: Fix affinity logic
-     Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x
-     Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
-
-The tag sequence has the meaning of:
-
-.. code-block:: none
-
-     git cherry-pick a1f84a3
-     git cherry-pick 1b9508f
-     git cherry-pick fd21073
-     git cherry-pick <this commit>
-
-Also, some patches may have kernel version prerequisites.  This can be
-specified in the following format in the sign-off area:
-
-.. code-block:: none
-
-     Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x-
-
-The tag has the meaning of:
-
-.. code-block:: none
-
-     git cherry-pick <this commit>
-
-For each "-stable" tree starting with the specified version.
-
-Following the submission:
-
- - The sender will receive an ACK when the patch has been accepted into the
-   queue, or a NAK if the patch is rejected.  This response might take a few
-   days, according to the developer's schedules.
- - If accepted, the patch will be added to the -stable queue, for review by
-   other developers and by the relevant subsystem maintainer.
-
-
-Review cycle
-------------
-
- - When the -stable maintainers decide for a review cycle, the patches will be
-   sent to the review committee, and the maintainer of the affected area of
-   the patch (unless the submitter is the maintainer of the area) and CC: to
-   the linux-kernel mailing list.
- - The review committee has 48 hours in which to ACK or NAK the patch.
- - If the patch is rejected by a member of the committee, or linux-kernel
-   members object to the patch, bringing up issues that the maintainers and
-   members did not realize, the patch will be dropped from the queue.
- - At the end of the review cycle, the ACKed patches will be added to the
-   latest -stable release, and a new -stable release will happen.
- - Security patches will be accepted into the -stable tree directly from the
-   security kernel team, and not go through the normal review cycle.
-   Contact the kernel security team for more details on this procedure.
-
-Trees
------
-
- - The queues of patches, for both completed versions and in progress
-   versions can be found at:
-
-	http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git
-
- - The finalized and tagged releases of all stable kernels can be found
-   in separate branches per version at:
-
-	http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git
-
-
-Review committee
-----------------
-
- - This is made up of a number of kernel developers who have volunteered for
-   this task, and a few that haven't.