[libvirt] [PATCH v3 1/3] docs, conf, schema: add support for shmem device

[Michal Privoznik]

On 08.10.2014 18:57, Maxime Leroy wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
> On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 10:45 PM, Martin Kletzander <mkletzan at redhat.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 09:42:36AM +0200, Michal Privoznik wrote:
>>>
>>> On 26.09.2014 12:43, Martin Kletzander wrote:
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/src/conf/domain_conf.c b/src/conf/domain_conf.c
>>>> index b114737..51bdd31 100644
>>>> --- a/src/conf/domain_conf.c
>>>> +++ b/src/conf/domain_conf.c
>>>
>>>
> [..]
>>>
>>
>> Nice catch.
>>
>> Since we are past the release anyway, I'm going to push this in a
>> while and whoever wants (e.g. Maxime) have the whole release cycle to
>> test this.
>>
>
> Thanks for pushing/cleaning the shmem patches support (i.e
> http://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2014-August/msg01032.html)
>
> But you did miss the following:
>
> 1. the ivshmem server autostart feature: you wanted me to develop it
> into the v1. (i.e.
> http://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2014-August/msg01432.html)
>
> 2. You did not wait for my tests. Why should I ask you to wait for my tests?
> Lucky enough, now I have the results of the tests, everything works fine ;)
>
> I don't understand why it became so urgent to push these patches.

Well, I'm not intending to speak on Martin's behalf, but my workflow is 
as follows: when developing a new code I create a local branch and put 
the commits there. And as the development goes on, I keep the branch 
rebased onto the current master. However, depending on the complexity of 
the code, rebase conflicts are likely to occur - and that's rather 
unpleasant. So once the patches are ready I'm pushing them nearly ASAP 
for two reasons: to get rid of the rebasing (others may be working in 
the same area in near future too, so I'd spare them having rebase 
conflicts), and to test the feature. As soon as an pubclic API is not 
released, there's still an possibility to revert the patches if they 
turn out to be rubbish.

So I'd say you both (you and Martin) obeyed the process. You've tested 
an upstream code. If it turned out that there's something wrong we could 
just fix it.

Michal