[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for April 05
From: |
Harsh Bora |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for April 05 |
Date: |
Thu, 07 Apr 2011 15:08:34 +0530 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.10) Gecko/20100621 Fedora/3.0.5-1.fc13 Thunderbird/3.0.5 |
On 04/06/2011 02:00 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 04/05/2011 03:25 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 5 April 2011 14:14, Stefan Hajnoczi<address@hidden> wrote:
This stems from the fact that development is centered around the
mailing list. Some folks have put technical documentation on the wiki
but a lot simply happens on the mailing list.
I'm unsure how we can sustainably keep the wiki up-to-date on detailed
code internals knowledge. Any suggestions, any examples of projects
doing this successfully?
Well, Libvirt community does follow the practice of requiring the patch
submitter to provide enough documentation within docs/ folder or in the
patch itself. The commiter ensures that the docs/ are updated with the
patch desc if docs/ are not updated as a part of the patch.
See http://libvirt.org/hacking.html#patches
Another approach would be to try to increase the use of docs/
for technical code internals information. The advantage would be
that we could choose to require docs/ updates for design changes
in order for a code change to pass patch review; the disadvantage
would be that it's inevitably more of a pain to update.
Yes, Its better to have code and docs being updated together with the
patches coming in, however, it will become more difficult to follow this
practice if it is not followed regularly, for. eg, if patch A doesnt
updates the docs as required, and a patch B which is based on Patch A
wants to update docs, it needs to get the required docuemntation for
patch A first before putting documentation for the patch B itself.
We've been unofficially doing that for a lot of recent stuff.
I don't know that that really helps with the problem of keeping it up to
date though.
Well, as we have been doing it unofficially for recent stuff, it will be
better to have it officially now :). It shall definitely help, as it
gives an opportunity to even update an obsolete piece of info as
compared to having no docs to update.
As they say, something is better than nothing !
regards,
Harsh
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
-- PMM
- Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for April 05, (continued)
- Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for April 05, Alexander Graf, 2011/04/05
- Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for April 05, Stefan Hajnoczi, 2011/04/05
- Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for April 05, Brad Hards, 2011/04/05
- Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for April 05, Alexander Graf, 2011/04/05
- Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for April 05, Stefan Hajnoczi, 2011/04/05
- Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for April 05, Brad Hards, 2011/04/05
- Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for April 05, Brad Hards, 2011/04/05
- Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for April 05, Stefan Hajnoczi, 2011/04/05
- Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for April 05, Peter Maydell, 2011/04/05
- Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for April 05, Anthony Liguori, 2011/04/05
- Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for April 05,
Harsh Bora <=
Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for April 05, Alon Levy, 2011/04/05