All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Tokarev <mjt@tls.msk.ru>
To: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-trivial <qemu-trivial@nongnu.org>,
	qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-trivial] [PATCH] docs/writing-qmp-commands: fix a typo
Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 15:27:04 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <55670998.1030505@msgid.tls.msk.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87twuwaoju.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>

28.05.2015 15:12, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Michael Tokarev <mjt@tls.msk.ru> writes:
[]
>> Marcus: I don't think such obvious and trivial changes needs to be re-sent
>> to -devel. Ofcourse it is better to send things to -devel rigth away, but
>> requiring to resent is a bit over the top.  I think anyway :)
> 
> Patches must be posted to -devel for review.
> 
> If you accept patches sent just to -trivial, then the only post to
> -devel will be your pull request, where it most probably won't get
> review.

Obvious typo fix in comment or doc don't really need a big review.
That's where the "too trivial" border can be drawn.

Just to be clear: I'm not, in any way, against posting things to -devel,
things SHOULD be posted to -devel.  But once a thing has been posted
like this one, just to -trivial, and it really _is_ trivial and obvious,
it is enough to say somehting among "This one is okay, but the next time
please send to -devel too".

Thanks,

/mjt

> Judging from my own experience, no patch is too trivial to screw up.
> Play it safe, post to -devel for review always.  Resending a trivial
> patch isn't exactly a big burden :)
> 



WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michael Tokarev <mjt@tls.msk.ru>
To: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-trivial <qemu-trivial@nongnu.org>,
	qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] docs/writing-qmp-commands: fix a typo
Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 15:27:04 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <55670998.1030505@msgid.tls.msk.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87twuwaoju.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>

28.05.2015 15:12, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Michael Tokarev <mjt@tls.msk.ru> writes:
[]
>> Marcus: I don't think such obvious and trivial changes needs to be re-sent
>> to -devel. Ofcourse it is better to send things to -devel rigth away, but
>> requiring to resent is a bit over the top.  I think anyway :)
> 
> Patches must be posted to -devel for review.
> 
> If you accept patches sent just to -trivial, then the only post to
> -devel will be your pull request, where it most probably won't get
> review.

Obvious typo fix in comment or doc don't really need a big review.
That's where the "too trivial" border can be drawn.

Just to be clear: I'm not, in any way, against posting things to -devel,
things SHOULD be posted to -devel.  But once a thing has been posted
like this one, just to -trivial, and it really _is_ trivial and obvious,
it is enough to say somehting among "This one is okay, but the next time
please send to -devel too".

Thanks,

/mjt

> Judging from my own experience, no patch is too trivial to screw up.
> Play it safe, post to -devel for review always.  Resending a trivial
> patch isn't exactly a big burden :)
> 

  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-05-28 12:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-05-26  9:25 [Qemu-trivial] [Qemu-devel][PATCH] docs/writing-qmp-commands: fix a typo Chen Hanxiao
2015-05-26 11:03 ` Markus Armbruster
2015-05-27  1:27   ` Chen, Hanxiao
2015-05-28 11:32 ` [Qemu-trivial] [PATCH] " Michael Tokarev
2015-05-28 11:32   ` [Qemu-devel] " Michael Tokarev
     [not found]   ` <87twuwaoju.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
2015-05-28 12:27     ` Michael Tokarev [this message]
2015-05-28 12:27       ` Michael Tokarev
2015-05-28 14:05       ` [Qemu-trivial] " Markus Armbruster
2015-05-28 14:05         ` Markus Armbruster
2015-05-28 14:08         ` [Qemu-trivial] " Peter Maydell
2015-05-28 14:08           ` Peter Maydell

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=55670998.1030505@msgid.tls.msk.ru \
    --to=mjt@tls.msk.ru \
    --cc=armbru@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=qemu-trivial@nongnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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.