Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Implement DAT for IPv6

[Antonio Quartulli <ordex@autistici.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1264 bytes --]

On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 11:22:37AM +0200, Mihail Costea wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I have created a patch for this, just that is quite big (~ 450 lines
> the whole patch, with signature, etc). It doesn't contain complex
> changes, just small changes from __be32 to (unsigned char *), a new
> parameter to functions in order to give the IP type and added
> comments.
> 
> I've tested it with the snooping mechanism I added for IPv6 and it
> works ok (the snooping mechanism is not in this patch).
> 
> What I wanted to ask is: it's ok to send a patch this big to the mailing list?
> I don't see how I could split it more because all I did is changed
> most of functions signatures and edit the code to support this
> changes.


The common rule is "one change per patch" meaning that if you can logically
split it (e.g. 1) add this 2) use this there and there 3) improve that) it would
be better to send more than one patch in one patchset.
Remember that each and every patch must compile.

Cheers,

p.s. if you want you can send the patch as RFC and see the others say (but
please try to think about splitting it, if really needed).

> 
> Thx,
> Mihail

-- 
Antonio Quartulli

..each of us alone is worth nothing..
Ernesto "Che" Guevara

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]