All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [virtio-dev] Requesting ballots for #31 and #32
@ 2019-02-13  1:38 Stefan Hajnoczi
  2019-02-13  2:04 ` [virtio-dev] " Michael S. Tsirkin
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Hajnoczi @ 2019-02-13  1:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: virtio-dev; +Cc: Michael S. Tsirkin

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 419 bytes --]

Hi,
I'd like to request ballots for the following issues:

"content: reserve virtio device ID for file system devices"
https://github.com/oasis-tcs/virtio-spec/issues/31

"virtio-blk: discard and write zeroes clarifications"
https://github.com/oasis-tcs/virtio-spec/issues/32

At least #32 is needed for VIRTIO 1.1 but #31 is trivial and will
prevent device ID conflicts so I suggest merging it too.

Thank you,
Stefan

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 455 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* [virtio-dev] Re: Requesting ballots for #31 and #32
  2019-02-13  1:38 [virtio-dev] Requesting ballots for #31 and #32 Stefan Hajnoczi
@ 2019-02-13  2:04 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
  2019-02-13  9:11   ` Stefan Hajnoczi
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Michael S. Tsirkin @ 2019-02-13  2:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Stefan Hajnoczi; +Cc: virtio-dev

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 09:38:13AM +0800, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> Hi,
> I'd like to request ballots for the following issues:
> 
> "content: reserve virtio device ID for file system devices"
> https://github.com/oasis-tcs/virtio-spec/issues/31
> 
> "virtio-blk: discard and write zeroes clarifications"
> https://github.com/oasis-tcs/virtio-spec/issues/32
> 
> At least #32 is needed for VIRTIO 1.1 but #31 is trivial and will
> prevent device ID conflicts so I suggest merging it too.
> 
> Thank you,
> Stefan

Would you say that #32 is a material change or not?

	"Material Change" is any change to the content of a Work Product that
	that would require a compliant application or implementation to be
	modified or rewritten in order to remain compliant or which adds new
	features or otherwise expands the scope of the work product.

I think you indicated in the past that it isn't.

However I think #31 would be a new feature. If yes including it would not
qualify as non material change and that would force
another public review round.

Would you agree?
If doesn't seem worth forcing a public review for a trivial change.


-- 
MST

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* [virtio-dev] Re: Requesting ballots for #31 and #32
  2019-02-13  2:04 ` [virtio-dev] " Michael S. Tsirkin
@ 2019-02-13  9:11   ` Stefan Hajnoczi
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Hajnoczi @ 2019-02-13  9:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Michael S. Tsirkin; +Cc: virtio-dev

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1333 bytes --]

On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 09:04:35PM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 09:38:13AM +0800, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I'd like to request ballots for the following issues:
> > 
> > "content: reserve virtio device ID for file system devices"
> > https://github.com/oasis-tcs/virtio-spec/issues/31
> > 
> > "virtio-blk: discard and write zeroes clarifications"
> > https://github.com/oasis-tcs/virtio-spec/issues/32
> > 
> > At least #32 is needed for VIRTIO 1.1 but #31 is trivial and will
> > prevent device ID conflicts so I suggest merging it too.
> > 
> > Thank you,
> > Stefan
> 
> Would you say that #32 is a material change or not?
> 
> 	"Material Change" is any change to the content of a Work Product that
> 	that would require a compliant application or implementation to be
> 	modified or rewritten in order to remain compliant or which adds new
> 	features or otherwise expands the scope of the work product.
> 
> I think you indicated in the past that it isn't.
> 
> However I think #31 would be a new feature. If yes including it would not
> qualify as non material change and that would force
> another public review round.
> 
> Would you agree?
> If doesn't seem worth forcing a public review for a trivial change.

Yes, I agree on both counts.

Stefan

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 455 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2019-02-13  9:12 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2019-02-13  1:38 [virtio-dev] Requesting ballots for #31 and #32 Stefan Hajnoczi
2019-02-13  2:04 ` [virtio-dev] " Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-02-13  9:11   ` Stefan Hajnoczi

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.