From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Keir Fraser Subject: Re: Xendomain Bug Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2007 13:01:34 +0100 Message-ID: References: <46A34079.3010507@gmx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <46A34079.3010507@gmx.de> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Henning Sprang Cc: Xen List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 22/7/07 12:33, "Henning Sprang" wrote: > Hmm, there is still one question left: > > The fix I proposed is a patch of about two lines - as can be seen here: > http://bugzilla.xensource.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=859 > > The fix you took in was much larger instead - in fact 2 lines vs. 20. > > see: http://xenbits.xensource.com/xen-unstable.hg?rev/865c4ae59be3 > > Is there something totally wrong with the small patch that I oversaw? > > Not that I have the urgent need to get my own patches in, but I usually > tend to think smaller patches should be better, and having less code to > maintain is better - and if I propose bad things, I want to know about it :) The only flaw with yours is that it went to bugzilla only, and was not sent to xen-devel. If you'd sent it to xen-devel it would have gone in. Now, not only has the larger fix gone in, but other patches also have piled on top. So, in future, send patches to xen-devel *as well as* attaching to bugzilla tickets! -- Keir