Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 for Xen 4.6 0/4] Enabling XL to set per-VCPU parameters of a domain for RTDS scheduler

[Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 01/06/15 09:58, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 01.06.15 at 10:50, <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 06/01/2015 09:48 AM, Ian Campbell wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2015-06-01 at 09:36 +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
>>>> Signed-off-by: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>> CC: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> CC: Wei Liu <wei.liu@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Most people put the Cc about the cut (---) which is fine too. It means
>>> the history ends up recording who was copied on the patch, which isn't
>>> necessarily a bad thing.
>> Right -- I would have thought that was useless information cluttering up
>> the history, but I can see how it might actually be useful.  Should I
>> start putting my CC's above the ---? :-)
> And should I stop dropping them even when above the --- for
> commit, which so far I've been doing as I don't consider this
> particularly useful information (other then e.g. who might have
> commented on a change without it being recorded in an Acked-by
> or Reviewed-by tag)?

Is the CC list useful to keep in history? It ends up being the list of
people who didn't respond to it before it got committed (or
ignored/missed the email entirely).

It is the $FOO'd-by tags which are important when it comes to judging
the acceptability of a patch.

~Andrew

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