From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nivedita Singhvi Subject: Re: [PATCH] Please pull xen-unstable-docs Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 09:34:33 -0800 Message-ID: <437384A9.5050004@us.ibm.com> References: <87acgcbftm.fsf@skyhawk.austin.ibm.com> <130969488a62c0a27715b6f24774833f@cl.cam.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <130969488a62c0a27715b6f24774833f@cl.cam.ac.uk> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Keir Fraser Cc: Robb Romans , xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Keir Fraser wrote: > > On 10 Nov 2005, at 16:58, Robb Romans wrote: > >> Here are a few cleanups for the Users' Manual, including adding a >> chapter on securing Xen from Anthony Liguori. This is also for testing >> that I have done things correctly in using the separate doc tree. >> >> Please pull from http://xenbits.xensource.com/ext/xen-unstable-docs.hg > > > Thanks! It would be more convenient to send small numbers of patches to > the list, rather than pulling them from an external tree. I end up > having to clone the tree, re-merge and do a diff to check what has > actually been changed (since hg doesn't have good visualisation tools). > It's worth it for trees that see plenty of activity like > xen-unstable-ia64 -- it doesn't currently seem worthwhile for > docuementation unless activity is going to ramp up significantly. Hi Keir, We had talked a bit with Ian about this much earlier, and he had preferred a hg tree. We can always just push patches out, too..We're going to start ramping up, and hope to put out a steady stream of stuff over the next week, but it won't be that kind of volume. Let us know if you'd prefer the patches, instead. thanks, Nivedita