From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Adrien Mazarguil <adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] doc: Clarify wording regarding actions
 and flow rules.
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2017 14:51:54 +0100
Message-ID: <20171204135154.GD4062@6wind.com>
References: <20171201182640.21885-1-roy.franz@cavium.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Roy Franz <roy.franz@cavium.com>
To: Roy Franz <rfranz@cavium.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wr0-f171.google.com (mail-wr0-f171.google.com
 [209.85.128.171]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51DC3239
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon,  4 Dec 2017 14:52:07 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-wr0-f171.google.com with SMTP id x49so17361149wrb.13
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 04 Dec 2017 05:52:07 -0800 (PST)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20171201182640.21885-1-roy.franz@cavium.com>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 10:26:39AM -0800, Roy Franz wrote:
> Current wording regarding actions and flow rules doesn't make sense.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Roy Franz <roy.franz@cavium.com>
> ---
> Maybe a better word than 'assigned' could be chosen?  (attached,
>  associated with, etc)  I'm happy to spin this if needed.

Agreed, "affected" doesn't make much sense here. I think "assigned" is the
best compromise (intelligibility / changes ratio).

This clarification is also a worthy candidate for stable@dpdk.org.

Acked-by: Adrien Mazarguil <adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com>

-- 
Adrien Mazarguil
6WIND