Re: [OPW PATCH V3] tools/xl: Call init function for libxl defined datatypes

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>]

On Mon, 2014-10-20 at 16:59 +0530, Uma Sharma wrote:
> I created a new patch for the new changes that I did afterwards.

I'm not sure which of the patches I have in my queue I should be
considering applying. Please can you tell me the message-ids of the set
of patches which are currently intended for application.

Or if you prefer you could resend the whole lot as a small series, e.g.
using git send-email as described in
http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/Submitting_Xen_Patches so they are all threaded
together in an easy to deal with way.

Thanks,

Ian.

> 
> Regards,
> Uma Sharma
> 
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 4:31 PM, George Dunlap
> <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> > On 10/19/2014 02:15 PM, Uma Sharma wrote:
> >>
> >> Actually I looked at the patch sending documentation it stated that if
> >> some changes are already acknowledged then we have to write it.
> >> Should I write a new patch with all these changes ? Or I can make the
> >> changes in different patches?
> >
> >
> > "Acked-by: Wei Liu <...>" means, "Wei Liu has looked at everything in this
> > patch and doesn't have any objections to it being committed."  That way, Ian
> > J can just take a quick look and check it in, trusing Wei's judgement.
> >
> > But in this case, Wei hasn't looked at the whole patch, but just half of it.
> > So Ian J might end up checking in code that hasn't been reviewed.
> >
> > Usually, if you change the patch at all (apart from trivial things like
> > whitespace or fixing clear violation of coding conventions) you have to drop
> > the ack.
> >
> > Since the code you're adding isn't necessarily connected to the code that
> > was already acked, just making a separate patch would have been the best
> > idea in this case.
> >
> >  -George
> >