From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 for-4.6 0/2] In-tree feature documentation
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2015 19:16:21 +0100
Message-ID: <55DF53F5.9010507@citrix.com>
References: <1440499228-961-1-git-send-email-andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
	<21983.9235.766205.452378@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
	<55DF2F4B.5080402@citrix.com>
	<21983.20417.595074.962559@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <21983.20417.595074.962559@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: Juergen Gross <JGross@suse.com>, Lars Kurth <lars.kurth@citrix.com>, Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>, Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>, Xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>, Jim Fehlig <jfehlig@suse.com>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 27/08/15 18:58, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Andrew Cooper writes ("Re: [RFC v2 for-4.6 0/2] In-tree feature documentation"):
>> On 27/08/15 15:52, Ian Jackson wrote:
>>> I do wonder whether cross-referencing all the "issues" is a good idea.
>>> It seems like it might be a lot of work to keep them in step.
>> I don't expect all the issues to be enumerated (generally, they would be
>> found the first time someone falls over the issue), but where known
>> interaction issues exist, we need to have some place to leave them.
> I was prompted to ask this because it seemed to me that some of the
> issues were discussed in other parts of the text or in other patches
> as well as in `issues'.

Which issues are you concerned about?

>
>> There are plenty of examples where known issues are documented somewhere
>> in the xen-devel archives, or in an individuals head, and neither of
>> these are useful places for the information to exist.
> I agree with this.  I think things should be in the tree, but once.

I am certainly not advocating needless repetition, but I don't see
anything in the submitted text which would quality.  I will happily
correct the text if I am mistaken.

~Andrew