From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:56207) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UUiph-00081j-3P for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Apr 2013 15:24:55 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UUipe-0000ZE-00 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Apr 2013 15:24:53 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:53108) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UUipd-0000Z2-O7 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Apr 2013 15:24:49 -0400 Message-ID: <5176DFFD.1040202@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2013 13:24:45 -0600 From: Eric Blake MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1366682139-22122-1-git-send-email-mrhines@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <87li89dtmc.fsf@codemonkey.ws> <5176CADB.4000304@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <87k3ntm7co.fsf@codemonkey.ws> In-Reply-To: <87k3ntm7co.fsf@codemonkey.ws> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="----enig2PKNPWKAQIXHGHNVVBKDQ" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v5 00/12] rdma: migration support List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Anthony Liguori Cc: quintela@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "Michael R. Hines" , owasserm@redhat.com, Bulent Abali , Michael R Hines , Gokul B Kandiraju , pbonzini@redhat.com This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) ------enig2PKNPWKAQIXHGHNVVBKDQ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 04/23/2013 12:26 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: >> There are no instructions/procedures documented on the qemu.org >> website on how to automatically generate "Reviewed-by" signatures. >=20 > I suspect there's some confusion here. Addressed review comments !=3D > Reviewed-by. There can always be additional comments. Someone has to > explicitly offer a Reviewed-by indicating that they are happy with the > patches overall. I've gone through the history on these patches and I > don't see any explicit Reviewed-by's other than Eric's most recent one.= Even then, my reviewed-by tag applied only to one patch (the QMP change) rather than the series as a whole. But you definitely did the right thing by pasting that in to the commit message of 10/12 on this round - even though it is a bit of manual effort on your part, you were already touching the rest of the series; and by adding the reviewed-by tag by hand, it's easier for other reviewers to add additional reviews and/or skip the patches that appear to already be adequately reviewed. >=20 > Give the series a little more time for people to look over it, it'll ge= t > Reviewed-bys when people are ready to offer them. And to some extent, it's up to the maintainer of the area you are touching to decide how many (or few) 3rd-party reviewed-by are necessary to feel comfortable with the series. Most maintainers like at least one other set of eyes looking at any non-trivial patch, although I'm not sure if there are any documented policies used by any particular maintainer (other than qemu-trivial patches have their own wiki page for best practices). So far, your series has been a good cycle of posting, response, and updating to meet the response; the fact that you are getting comments from several people means that you are likely to get reviewed-by from those people when they are happy with the end result (or another round of comments on things to fix). And if all else fails, if you go a week without any response at all, it is generally acceptable to ping the maintainer to ask for help in recruiting the appropriate reviewers and/or a decision that the maintainer's review is sufficient. Also, don't be surprised if not everyone reviews the entire series; sometimes reviewers like myself focus only on the portion of the series that interacts with my current interests (I tend to review anything QMP, because I want to make sure the design will be sane for libvirt interaction, while overlooking things like migration internals because they are black box ops to libvirt if the interface was sane). --=20 Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org ------enig2PKNPWKAQIXHGHNVVBKDQ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Public key at http://people.redhat.com/eblake/eblake.gpg Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJRdt/9AAoJEKeha0olJ0NqjigH/A0u0cNSK09KZYYVFZU1SLQT ZCpzEpk4MWjd+RhzvjdgmSKJz+CfbdNFvXCNnysRTHeZc3tdxIkO2prYVzmUdsrf VagfkJM0r97YWrvBEnPcjMNlBcSNY5ZFUNsJl0Pwmq70vAA9Mu9WfV8PKQAbKjrw FXVdEiXDgDxl4env1udp7/akgCudX6MSrdXD4gRDgdMH6sYPhImWzMfUdN1eDFjC JqhtTWRFJXE3mmsoHuJDFettCG/rHr6x7jo0NWJef6IW0NHa6C6dqph8MYRdulBQ MW9iFBJpKvY+yqNTDbDnK9NjsIhLPN/jvKpeY9LNBftmasTCa5IsewBTF1X2gLw= =vtlI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------enig2PKNPWKAQIXHGHNVVBKDQ--