-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Checking the changelog today for xen-unstable.hg, I find that some of the work that IBM has contributed to the Users'' Manual and Interface Manual has been discarded. Would someone from Xen please be kind enough to explain why this happened? What is the status of the patch that I submitted on Monday? Regards, Robb - -- Robb Romans (512) 838-0419 Linux Commando T/L 678-0419 ARS NA5TT .-- - ..-. ..--.. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/> iD8DBQFDlxF9doW/RCLrCx0RAoMGAJ9XIKGIN/LGAu+xjrZGsk1aTGfE4ACguea8 INhzUINH7vA/VWlJZcgWZKE=3GJt -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
> Checking the changelog today for xen-unstable.hg, I find that some of > the work that IBM has contributed to the Users'' Manual and Interface > Manual has been discarded.Which work are you referring to?> Would someone from Xen please be kind enough to explain why this > happened?Prior to the release we tidied up the documentation to make it at least consistent/correct (as far as possible). It may be that this involved removing some of your text - but cannot say as I''m not aware what your text was (see above).> What is the status of the patch that I submitted on Monday?The patch you submitted on Monday was against an older version of the tree and has not yet been applied. cheers, S. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1>>>>> "SH" == Steven Hand <Steven.Hand@cl.cam.ac.uk> writes:>> Checking the changelog today for xen-unstable.hg, I find that >> some of the work that IBM has contributed to the Users'' Manual >> and Interface Manual has been discarded. SH> Which work are you referring to? :) For example, the Users'' Manual is now one 74K file. There was agreement between us and Xen to break it into smaller chunks, and we spent the time to do that. >> Would someone from Xen please be kind enough to explain why this >> happened? SH> Prior to the release we tidied up the documentation to make it SH> at least consistent/correct (as far as possible). It may be that SH> this involved removing some of your text - but cannot say as I''m SH> not aware what your text was (see above). It is not "my text". It is work done by IBM that was accepted into the tree. The changes I''m referring to appear to have happened after the release. My guess is that is a consequence of your internal tree being pushed out to the open source tree. [8305: Xen patchbot -unstable ] [Xen-changelog] Updated docs for Xen 3.0. From: Xen patchbot -unstable <patchbot-unstable@lists.xensource.com> Subject: [Xen-changelog] Updated docs for Xen 3.0. To: xen-changelog@lists.xensource.com Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 17:52:14 +0000 Reply-To: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com # HG changeset patch # User smh22@firebug.cl.cam.ac.uk # Node ID c8fdb0caa77b429cf47f9707926e83947778cb48 # Parent 0255f48b757fc4a69846356e8f42e9a4ed410c8c Updated docs for Xen 3.0. Signed-off-by: Steven Hand <steven@xensource.com> <snip> >> What is the status of the patch that I submitted on Monday? SH> The patch you submitted on Monday was against an older version SH> of the tree and has not yet been applied. It wasn''t an older version when it was submitted. Regards, Robb - -- Robb Romans (512) 838-0419 Linux Commando T/L 678-0419 ARS NA5TT .-- - ..-. ..--.. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/> iD8DBQFDlx94doW/RCLrCx0RAk2fAJ9T/7fI+FpSsakUAvejcMDatQjS5QCfb+Jl GZJ8UzHshE8IFIj9WzqGfn0=/GgF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > >>>>> "SH" == Steven Hand <Steven.Hand@cl.cam.ac.uk> writes: > > >> Checking the changelog today for xen-unstable.hg, I find that > >> some of the work that IBM has contributed to the Users'' Manual > >> and Interface Manual has been discarded. > > SH> Which work are you referring to? > > :) > > For example, the Users'' Manual is now one 74K file. There was agreement > between us and Xen to break it into smaller chunks, and we spent the > time to do that.Yes, I moved it (and the interface manual) back into one file to more easily enable spell checking etc. It doesn''t seem that there''s much benefit in having lots of small files - hg is fine with merges and patches to parts of text files. Are you keen to re-break it apart? I could understand if there were lots of discrete edits taking place in various and an inability to use merge but surely this is not the case?> >> Would someone from Xen please be kind enough to explain why this > >> happened? > > SH> Prior to the release we tidied up the documentation to make it > SH> at least consistent/correct (as far as possible). It may be that > SH> this involved removing some of your text - but cannot say as I''m > SH> not aware what your text was (see above). > > It is not "my text". It is work done by IBM that was accepted into the > tree.Understood.> The changes I''m referring to appear to have happened after the > release. My guess is that is a consequence of your internal tree being > pushed out to the open source tree.Yes, sorry - I checked it into our internal staging tree which then took a little while to be pushed publically (since we run regression tests before a push to ensure the tree is not badly broken).> [8305: Xen patchbot -unstable ] [Xen-changelog] Updated docs for Xen > 3.0. > From: Xen patchbot -unstable <patchbot-unstable@lists.xensource.com> > Subject: [Xen-changelog] Updated docs for Xen 3.0. > To: xen-changelog@lists.xensource.com > Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 17:52:14 +0000 > Reply-To: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > > # HG changeset patch > # User smh22@firebug.cl.cam.ac.uk > # Node ID c8fdb0caa77b429cf47f9707926e83947778cb48 > # Parent 0255f48b757fc4a69846356e8f42e9a4ed410c8c > Updated docs for Xen 3.0. > > Signed-off-by: Steven Hand <steven@xensource.com> > <snip> > > >> What is the status of the patch that I submitted on Monday? > > SH> The patch you submitted on Monday was against an older version > SH> of the tree and has not yet been applied. > > It wasn''t an older version when it was submitted.True - my bad. I''ve merged and applied it to the staging tree - should be pushed out soon. cheers, S. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1>>>>> "SH" == Steven Hand <Steven.Hand@cl.cam.ac.uk> writes:>> >>>>> "SH" == Steven Hand <Steven.Hand@cl.cam.ac.uk> writes: >> >> >> Checking the changelog today for xen-unstable.hg, I find that >> >> some of the work that IBM has contributed to the Users'' Manual >> >> and Interface Manual has been discarded. SH> Which work are you referring to? >> :) >> >> For example, the Users'' Manual is now one 74K file. There was >> agreement between us and Xen to break it into smaller chunks, and >> we spent the time to do that. SH> Yes, I moved it (and the interface manual) back into one file to SH> more easily enable spell checking etc. It doesn''t seem that SH> there''s much benefit in having lots of small files - hg is fine SH> with merges and patches to parts of text files. SH> Are you keen to re-break it apart? I could understand if there SH> were lots of discrete edits taking place in various and an SH> inability to use merge but surely this is not the case? I am able to work with the documentation in whatever format the community desires. Personally, I don''t mind if that is one large file, or several smaller ones. Let''s do stick with one or the other, though. >> >> Would someone from Xen please be kind enough to explain why >> this >> happened? SH> Prior to the release we tidied up the documentation to make it SH> at least consistent/correct (as far as possible). It may be that SH> this involved removing some of your text - but cannot say as I''m SH> not aware what your text was (see above). >> It is not "my text". It is work done by IBM that was accepted >> into the tree. SH> Understood. >> The changes I''m referring to appear to have happened after the >> release. My guess is that is a consequence of your internal tree >> being pushed out to the open source tree. SH> Yes, sorry - I checked it into our internal staging tree which SH> then took a little while to be pushed publically (since we run SH> regression tests before a push to ensure the tree is not badly SH> broken). >> [8305: Xen patchbot -unstable ] [Xen-changelog] Updated docs for >> Xen 3.0. From: Xen patchbot -unstable >> <patchbot-unstable@lists.xensource.com> Subject: [Xen-changelog] >> Updated docs for Xen 3.0. To: xen-changelog@lists.xensource.com >> Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 17:52:14 +0000 Reply-To: >> xen-devel@lists.xensource.com >> >> # HG changeset patch # User smh22@firebug.cl.cam.ac.uk # Node ID >> c8fdb0caa77b429cf47f9707926e83947778cb48 # Parent >> 0255f48b757fc4a69846356e8f42e9a4ed410c8c Updated docs for Xen >> 3.0. >> >> Signed-off-by: Steven Hand <steven@xensource.com> <snip> >> >> What is the status of the patch that I submitted on Monday? SH> The patch you submitted on Monday was against an older version SH> of the tree and has not yet been applied. >> It wasn''t an older version when it was submitted. SH> True - my bad. SH> I''ve merged and applied it to the staging tree - should be SH> pushed out soon. That is good news. Thanks very much. SH> cheers, SH> S. Regards, Robb - -- Robb Romans (512) 838-0419 Linux Commando T/L 678-0419 ARS NA5TT .-- - ..-. ..--.. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/> iD8DBQFDly8ddoW/RCLrCx0RAp3jAKC4Bm3rYnpDeJPzX0AxrwV5Lrh3pQCeMiDl w/8XF/w7QUJY2zsiMU4K3w8=6Faw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel