From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs/traces Acked patches. Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 15:57:31 -0400 Message-ID: <20130325195731.GA652@phenom.dumpdata.com> References: <1364222482-14697-1-git-send-email-konrad.wilk@oracle.com> <515077C402000078000C830A@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <51506F37.70600@eu.citrix.com> <51507FE102000078000C8398@nat28.tlf.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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: Ian Jackson , Jan Beulich , xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 04:43:24PM +0000, George Dunlap wrote: > On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 3:48 PM, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>>> On 25.03.13 at 16:37, George Dunlap wrote: > >> On 25/03/13 15:13, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>>>>> On 25.03.13 at 15:41, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > >>>> Please commit these patches. I can also put these on a git tree > >>>> (if you could create on for me on xenbits.org that is it) for a git pull. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> The trace patches have been Acked-by George. > >>> You know what - I didn't apply them precisely because the ack > >>> came through only for patches 3 and 4. I just checked the > >>> xen-devel archives again, and that's the state of affairs right > >>> now too. Possibly the ack was sent to you without Cc-ing > >>> xen-devel, but that doesn't allow me to apply them. > >> > >> Is that because I had already Ack-ed an earlier version of the same > >> patches, as noted right above Konrad's S-o-B line? > > > > I must have overlooked that, partly because I expect Acked-by > > to be below Signed-off-by (only Reported-by goes ahead of it in > > my opinion, to reflect work/event flow). > > > >> I'm not 100% sure the normal protocol, but Konrad has been around the > >> block a few times; I would think that if Konrad put my Ack-by on > >> something, then that should have the presumption of validity -- > >> particularly if he cc'd me (which he did) and I didn't nack it. > > > > I see now that he Cc-ed you on the post from the 18th, but I > > specifically noted that he didn't Cc you on the resubmission > > today. Which together with me not having noticed the earlier > > ack made things look inconsistent/incomplete. > > Ah, right -- which is also why I didn't notice that he had re-sent the > patch series. :-) > > Konrad, are you not using "git send-email"? I thought it normally I am. > added cc's for Acked-by's... It usually does. Wonder if I accidently hit the 'n' key when it asks me whether to add those emails to it. > > -George