From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Campbell Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 for Xen 4.6 0/4] Enabling XL to set per-VCPU parameters of a domain for RTDS scheduler Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2015 10:44:05 +0100 Message-ID: <1433151845.15036.84.camel@citrix.com> References: <1432630782.14664.60.camel@citrix.com> <1432898136.5077.13.camel@citrix.com> <556C1994.4090101@eu.citrix.com> <1433148506.15036.78.camel@citrix.com> <556C1CC8.10301@eu.citrix.com> <556C3AF2020000780007F952@mail.emea.novell.com> <556C209D.2080906@citrix.com> <556C23DF.3040903@eu.citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <556C23DF.3040903@eu.citrix.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: George Dunlap Cc: Wei Liu , Andrew Cooper , Dario Faggioli , Ian Jackson , xen-devel , Meng Xu , Meng Xu , Jan Beulich , Chong Li , Dagaen Golomb List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Mon, 2015-06-01 at 10:20 +0100, George Dunlap wrote: > On 06/01/2015 10:06 AM, Andrew Cooper wrote: > > On 01/06/15 09:58, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>>>> On 01.06.15 at 10:50, wrote: > >>> On 06/01/2015 09:48 AM, Ian Campbell wrote: > >>>> On Mon, 2015-06-01 at 09:36 +0100, George Dunlap wrote: > >>>>> Signed-off-by: George Dunlap > >>>>> --- > >>>>> CC: Ian Campbell > >>>>> CC: Wei Liu > >>>> Most people put the Cc about the cut (---) which is fine too. It means > >>>> the history ends up recording who was copied on the patch, which isn't > >>>> necessarily a bad thing. > >>> Right -- I would have thought that was useless information cluttering up > >>> the history, but I can see how it might actually be useful. Should I > >>> start putting my CC's above the ---? :-) > >> And should I stop dropping them even when above the --- for > >> commit, which so far I've been doing as I don't consider this > >> particularly useful information (other then e.g. who might have > >> commented on a change without it being recorded in an Acked-by > >> or Reviewed-by tag)? > > > > Is the CC list useful to keep in history? It ends up being the list of > > people who didn't respond to it before it got committed (or > > ignored/missed the email entirely). > > > > It is the $FOO'd-by tags which are important when it comes to judging > > the acceptability of a patch. > > OK, well that's 3 of us so far who think it's sort of useless, including > someone who things it's useless enough to spend the effort deleting > them. Maybe we can leave the bike shed the color it is at the moment. ;-) I used to delete them, but it was tiresome and seemed like a waste of effort since, whatever the magnitude, the information content isn't 0 and they are harmless. Ian.