[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 01/12] xenctx: Clean up stack trace when hypercall_page not in symbol table
|
On 11/07/13 07:36, Ian Campbell wrote:
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.
Well, I was confused. get_maintainer.pl reports that
George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
(supporter:XENTRACE)
Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (supporter:TOOLSTACK)
Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
(supporter:TOOLSTACK)
Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> (supporter:TOOLSTACK)
From MAINTAINERS:
ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ M: Mail patches to: FullName <address@domain>
and I followed that. It was months ago that I read over the wiki
page.
Jan came from:
>>> On 17.10.13 at 20:41, Don Slutz <dslutz@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Don Slutz <Don@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Also fixup handling of symbol files, and output of 2 page stacks, and output
> of non stack memory.
Considering the size of the change this should be broken up, and
the individual changes need to be described better in the commit
message.
[...]
and my understanding was that re-worked patches need to have
--to=<responder> added. One on the things that is not clear
is do I change from --cc= to --to=after a response?
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.
I would agree. I would also change the wording in MAINTAINERS.
ÂÂ -Don Slutz
|
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
