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

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

On Mon, 2015-06-01 at 10:20 +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
> On 06/01/2015 10:06 AM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> > On 01/06/15 09:58, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>>>> On 01.06.15 at 10:50, <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com> 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@eu.citrix.com>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>> CC: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
> >>>>> CC: Wei Liu <wei.liu@citrix.com>
> >>>> 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.
> 
> OK, well that's 3 of us so far who think it's sort of useless, including
> someone who things it's useless enough to spend the effort deleting
> them.  Maybe we can leave the bike shed the color it is at the moment. ;-)

I used to delete them, but it was tiresome and seemed like a waste of
effort since, whatever the magnitude, the information content isn't 0
and they are harmless.

Ian.