From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:42308) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TvVra-0006sz-VH for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 11:29:20 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TvVrZ-0007xg-MC for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 11:29:18 -0500 Received: from nodalink.pck.nerim.net ([62.212.105.220]:43416 helo=paradis.irqsave.net) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TvVrZ-0007xa-Ex for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 11:29:17 -0500 Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 17:26:00 +0100 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Beno=EEt?= Canet Message-ID: <20130116162559.GB3383@irqsave.net> References: <1358351321-4891-1-git-send-email-benoit@irqsave.net> <50F6CF5E.6060506@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <50F6CF5E.6060506@redhat.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC V5 00/62] QCOW2 deduplication List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Eric Blake Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefanha@redhat.com > Psychologically, reviewers tend to shy away from a 62-patch series, as > it implies a major time commitment to go through. Sending this as thre= e > separate series, with clear instructions in the later ones that they > depend on earlier ones, aids the review process, even if it actually > results in more mail. This is because each series no longer has quite > as many associated patches and it becomes easier for a reviewer to > tackle one series at a time. Splitted and reposted as three patchsets. Regards Beno=EEt