Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] docs/traces Acked patches.

[George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 3:48 PM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> On 25.03.13 at 16:37, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 25/03/13 15:13, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>> On 25.03.13 at 15:41, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>> Please commit these patches. I can also put these on a git tree
>>>> (if you could create on for me on xenbits.org that is it) for a git pull.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The trace patches have been Acked-by George.
>>> You know what - I didn't apply them precisely because the ack
>>> came through only for patches 3 and 4. I just checked the
>>> xen-devel archives again, and that's the state of affairs right
>>> now too. Possibly the ack was sent to you without Cc-ing
>>> xen-devel, but that doesn't allow me to apply them.
>>
>> Is that because I had already Ack-ed an earlier version of the same
>> patches, as noted right above Konrad's S-o-B line?
>
> I must have overlooked that, partly because I expect Acked-by
> to be below Signed-off-by (only Reported-by goes ahead of it in
> my opinion, to reflect work/event flow).
>
>> I'm not 100% sure the normal protocol, but Konrad has been around the
>> block a few times; I would think that if Konrad put my Ack-by on
>> something, then that should have the presumption of validity --
>> particularly if he cc'd me (which he did) and I didn't nack it.
>
> I see now that he Cc-ed you on the post from the 18th, but I
> specifically noted that he didn't Cc you on the resubmission
> today. Which together with me not having noticed the earlier
> ack made things look inconsistent/incomplete.

Ah, right -- which is also why I didn't notice that he had re-sent the
patch series. :-)

Konrad, are you not using "git send-email"? I thought it normally
added cc's for Acked-by's...

 -George

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel