Re: [RFC v2 for-4.6 0/2] In-tree feature documentation

[Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>]

On 27/08/15 18:58, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Andrew Cooper writes ("Re: [RFC v2 for-4.6 0/2] In-tree feature documentation"):
>> On 27/08/15 15:52, Ian Jackson wrote:
>>> I do wonder whether cross-referencing all the "issues" is a good idea.
>>> It seems like it might be a lot of work to keep them in step.
>> I don't expect all the issues to be enumerated (generally, they would be
>> found the first time someone falls over the issue), but where known
>> interaction issues exist, we need to have some place to leave them.
> I was prompted to ask this because it seemed to me that some of the
> issues were discussed in other parts of the text or in other patches
> as well as in `issues'.

Which issues are you concerned about?

>
>> There are plenty of examples where known issues are documented somewhere
>> in the xen-devel archives, or in an individuals head, and neither of
>> these are useful places for the information to exist.
> I agree with this.  I think things should be in the tree, but once.

I am certainly not advocating needless repetition, but I don't see
anything in the submitted text which would quality.  I will happily
correct the text if I am mistaken.

~Andrew