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

Re: [libvirt] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/3] pvpanic: rename to isa-pvpanic



On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 02:41:51PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 22/08/2013 14:43, Laszlo Ersek ha scritto:
> > On 08/21/13 19:06, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> Il 21/08/2013 19:07, Michael S. Tsirkin ha scritto:
> > 
> >>> NACK
> >>
> >> You know that a single developer's NACK counts nothing (it can be you,
> >> it can be me), don't you?
> > 
> > going meta...
> > 
> > What's this?
> > 
> > All I know (... I think I know) about patch acceptance is that Anthony
> > prefers to have at least one R-b. As far as I've seen this is not a hard
> > requirement (for example, maintainers sometimes send unreviewed patches
> > in a pull request, and on occasion they are merged).
> > 
> > No words have been spent on NAKs yet (... since my subscription, that
> > is). Is this stuff formalized somewhere?
> > 
> > Sorry for wasting time...
> 
> No, it's not.  But for example I NACKed removal of pvpanic from 1.6, it
> was overridden, and I didn't complain too much.
> 
> Paolo

I don't think it was overridden.

In fact you NACKed an explicit -device pvpanic.  You suggested disabling
in 1.6 but keeping it a builtin, but this was never implemented,
afterwards issues with Linux guests surfaced, we discussed this
again on the KVM call, and there seemed to be a
concensus that it's an OK patch, with some issues. A week later Marcel
sent v2, it worked and looked like the least problematic path to take.

-- 
MST


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