[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Daniel Veillard] Re: [Libvir] [PATCH] update from gnulib



On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 03:16:19PM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
> Forwarding, on request:
> 
>   Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 04:53:43 -0400
>   From: Daniel Veillard <veillard redhat com>
>   To: Jim Meyering <meyering redhat com>
>   Cc: undisclosed-recipients: ;
>   Subject: Re: [Libvir] [PATCH] update from gnulib
>   Message-ID: <20080430085343 GF25119 redhat com>
>   Reply-To: veillard redhat com
>   References: <20080430072336 4A4D18E0038 hormel redhat com>
>   In-Reply-To: <20080430072336 4A4D18E0038 hormel redhat com>
>   User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-09-08)
> 
>   On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 05:57:36PM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
>   >
>   > Signed-off-by: Jim Meyering <meyering redhat com>
> 
>     Hum, to me the gnulib update side is under your control, I don't
>   feel it's necessary for you to post the patch, unless you know there
>   may be an associated change for the other developpers. Others may disagree
>   but I don't think I can really review those :-)

Yep, I agree - its fine to update gnulib and just notify the list afterwards.
There's nothing we can sensibly review in the patch, and after all, the 
whole point of gnulib is that other people have already reviewed & tested 
this for us :-)

Dan.
-- 
|: Red Hat, Engineering, Boston   -o-   http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org  -o-  http://virt-manager.org  -o-  http://ovirt.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: GnuPG: 7D3B9505  -o-  F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :|


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]