From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=35012 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q7lfy-0006KB-Em for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2011 05:38:55 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q7lfw-0004Tt-2m for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2011 05:38:53 -0400 Received: from e28smtp04.in.ibm.com ([122.248.162.4]:51051) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q7lfq-0004Rb-SB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2011 05:38:52 -0400 Received: from d28relay03.in.ibm.com (d28relay03.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.60]) by e28smtp04.in.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id p379cZ8Q016087 for ; Thu, 7 Apr 2011 15:08:35 +0530 Received: from d28av02.in.ibm.com (d28av02.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.64]) by d28relay03.in.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id p379cZcG3776552 for ; Thu, 7 Apr 2011 15:08:35 +0530 Received: from d28av02.in.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d28av02.in.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id p379cY04004168 for ; Thu, 7 Apr 2011 19:38:35 +1000 Message-ID: <4D9D861A.8080106@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2011 15:08:34 +0530 From: Harsh Bora MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for April 05 References: <201104051601.02762.bradh@frogmouth.net> <21351316-8430-4743-B75C-4299383F7D76@suse.de> <201104052221.35703.bradh@frogmouth.net> <4D9B7BF5.9080509@codemonkey.ws> In-Reply-To: <4D9B7BF5.9080509@codemonkey.ws> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Anthony Liguori Cc: Peter Maydell , Brad Hards , Stefan Hajnoczi , "M. Mohan Kumar" , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Sripathi Kodi , "Aneesh Kumar K. V" , "Venkateswararao Jujjuri (JV)" On 04/06/2011 02:00 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote: > On 04/05/2011 03:25 PM, Peter Maydell wrote: >> On 5 April 2011 14:14, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: >>> This stems from the fact that development is centered around the >>> mailing list. Some folks have put technical documentation on the wiki >>> but a lot simply happens on the mailing list. >>> I'm unsure how we can sustainably keep the wiki up-to-date on detailed >>> code internals knowledge. Any suggestions, any examples of projects >>> doing this successfully? Well, Libvirt community does follow the practice of requiring the patch submitter to provide enough documentation within docs/ folder or in the patch itself. The commiter ensures that the docs/ are updated with the patch desc if docs/ are not updated as a part of the patch. See http://libvirt.org/hacking.html#patches >> Another approach would be to try to increase the use of docs/ >> for technical code internals information. The advantage would be >> that we could choose to require docs/ updates for design changes >> in order for a code change to pass patch review; the disadvantage >> would be that it's inevitably more of a pain to update. Yes, Its better to have code and docs being updated together with the patches coming in, however, it will become more difficult to follow this practice if it is not followed regularly, for. eg, if patch A doesnt updates the docs as required, and a patch B which is based on Patch A wants to update docs, it needs to get the required docuemntation for patch A first before putting documentation for the patch B itself. > > We've been unofficially doing that for a lot of recent stuff. > > I don't know that that really helps with the problem of keeping it up to > date though. Well, as we have been doing it unofficially for recent stuff, it will be better to have it officially now :). It shall definitely help, as it gives an opportunity to even update an obsolete piece of info as compared to having no docs to update. As they say, something is better than nothing ! regards, Harsh > > Regards, > > Anthony Liguori > >> -- PMM >> > > >