[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] [RESEND2] Qemu unmaintained?

From: Avi Kivity
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] [RESEND2] Qemu unmaintained?
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 21:40:29 +0300
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv: Gecko/20090814 Fedora/3.0-2.6.b3.fc11 Thunderbird/3.0b3

On 09/10/2009 09:29 PM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Thu, 2009-09-10 at 19:35 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:

Unfairly picking on Mark (who usually writes truly excellent changelogs,
but this one is such a gem):

Subject: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 01/19] Suppress more more kraxelism

Let's kick off this series with some of the more critical fixes.

Signed-off-by: Mark McLoughlin<address@hidden>

What would you be thinking hunting the commit log for some change and
coming up with this?

(Mark, apologies for picking on you, it's truly unfair of me, but I
can't help it)
As you say, I normally try very hard with my changelogs, but I don't
think the odd joke hurts much.

Jokes are fine, but the commit log is sacred.

   - This "apply everything, test at length, reject problematic patches"
     appears to lead to a very batchy patch flow; there's a trade off to
     be made between trying to catch every regression before it hits the
     tree and the delay that effort introduces before the tree gets more
     widely tested by others

For qemu.git I'd agree since it's undergoing a lot of churn. Unfortunately it also feeds qemu-kvm.git which I try very hard to keep regression-free (and finding and fixing regressions during a merge is quite horrible), so I'd really appreciate it if qemu.git quality didn't deteriorate.

(and we're quite far from catching every regression btw).

Anthony, how long are your test cycles?

I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]