Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 01/12] xenctx: Clean up stack trace when hypercall_page not in symbol table

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 2013-11-07 at 08:47 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 07.11.13 at 09:22, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2013-11-07 at 08:07 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> And a note on patch submission: You send _to_ the list, and _cc_
> >> maintainers and other relevant people (without stretching the
> >> meaning of "relevant" too much).
> > 
> > Do we need such a rule? Why is it useful?
> > 
> > I personally don't mind which field causes the mail to arrive in my
> > INBOX. I suppose you filter "To: xen-devel; Cc: Jan" differently to "To:
> > Jan; Cc: xen-devel"?
> 
> Exactly. Mails Cc-ed to me get treated almost equally to all other
> xen-devel traffic, whereas mails directed at me mean to me that
> a response or other kind of action is expected. Basically the
> usual (common sense?) email rules...
> 
> So maybe I was too strict about the maintainer part - I don't mind
> being sent mails to me that fall under the areas I'm maintainer of,
> since there I'm obviously requested to take some sort of action.
> But in the case here I certainly feel it was wrong to send the
> whole series _to_ everyone.

Ah, yes that makes sense, I hadn't noticed that bit.

> > http://wiki.xenproject.org/wiki/Submitting_Xen_Patches#Cc_the_maintainer_of_
> >  
> > the_code_you_are_modifying is confusingly worded and somewhat 
> > contradictory, 
> > in that it initially requests to send to the maintainer and then later to 
> > cc 
> > them. As I say, I don't think it really matters which but if you care then 
> > it 
> > would be useful to clarify the wording there.
> 
> Yes, I think we should.



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel