From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57249) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XXGzi-0005WO-B9 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 25 Sep 2014 17:54:40 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XXGzc-0005TA-2m for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 25 Sep 2014 17:54:34 -0400 Received: from dew.nodalink.com ([95.130.14.197]:60894) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XXGzb-0005Of-Ky for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 25 Sep 2014 17:54:27 -0400 Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 21:54:39 +0000 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Beno=EEt?= Canet Message-ID: <20140925215439.GA23792@nodalink.com> References: <1410891148-28849-1-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com> <1410891148-28849-4-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com> <20140922145955.GD4026@noname.redhat.com> <87a95r4nt3.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> <20140923114556.GF3871@noname.str.redhat.com> <87fvfimrd0.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> <20140923133603.GI3871@noname.str.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140923133603.GI3871@noname.str.redhat.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 03/23] block: Connect BlockBackend to BlockDriverState List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Kevin Wolf Cc: famz@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Markus Armbruster , mreitz@redhat.com, stefanha@redhat.com, benoit.canet@nodalink.com On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 03:36:03PM +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote: > Do we have a KVM Forum block layer agenda yet? I think this thread coul= d > already contain a few topics to discuss there. Being the guy who constantly bring back painfull issues (Block filters, Block Backend) on the table I think we should also do a B= OFH (Stefan's idea on a private discussion) about how we can further tweak an= d improve the review process. I experienced on some other open sources projects as complex as the QEMU = block layer a feeling of reactivity while contributing patches and while the ne= w QEMU block layer review process is starting we are not here yet. One idea I have is that we could benefit from this event to establish sem= i informal peering review contracts between contributors like the ISP does = for bandwith. Of course we should be carefull to avoid to go the academic review circle= route and left some for unknown people. Best regards Beno=EEt >=20 > Kevin