[libvirt] [PATCH] news: document libxl tunnelled migration support

[Joao Martins]

On 02/16/2017 01:24 AM, Jim Fehlig wrote:
> On 02/15/2017 05:06 PM, Joao Martins wrote:
>> On 02/15/2017 11:41 PM, Jim Fehlig wrote:
>>> Joao Martins wrote:
>>>> Signed-off-by: Joao Martins <joao.m.martins at oracle.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>  docs/news.xml | 10 ++++++++++
>>>>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/docs/news.xml b/docs/news.xml
>>>> index b756a97..b0629b5 100644
>>>> --- a/docs/news.xml
>>>> +++ b/docs/news.xml
>>>> @@ -53,6 +53,16 @@
>>>>            was <code>virtio-net</code>.
>>>>          </description>
>>>>        </change>
>>>> +      <change>
>>>> +        <summary>
>>>> +          libxl: add tunnelled migration support
>>>> +        </summary>
>>>> +        <description>
>>>> +          Add tunnelled migration to libxl driver, which is always capable of
>>>> +          strong encryption and doesn't require any extra network connection
>>>> +          other than what's required for remote access of libvirtd.
>>>> +        </description>
>>>> +      </change>
>>>>      </section>
>>>>      <section title="Improvements">
>>>>        <change>
>>>
>>> Pushed, but only after realizing tunneled is misspelled :-(. No use perpetuating
>>> the misspelling of tunneled, so I've pushed a trivial followup.
>>
>> Interesting, I didn't know that. Greping the whole repo for "tunnelled" and you
>> will find a *lot* of matches:
>>
>> $ git grep tunneled | wc -l
>> 10
>> $ git grep tunnelled | wc -l
>> 1242
> 
> So the incorrect spelling is used over 100x more than the correct one :-)

Hehe :D

>> Hmm, but the internets aren't really clear. Some hits say tunneled vs tunnelled
>> being both correct.
> 
> Heh, as a native speaker I'm not sure which spelling is correct, but seem to 
> recall a prior discussion on the list proclaiming 'tunneled'. If folks prefer I 
> can revert the s/tunnelled/tunneled/ commit.

Sorry I may have mis-expressed myself before - didn't meant this being an issue.
I was just curious about the word because I made that same mistake throughout
the patches. Probably there's no need for revert with both appearing correct (as
folks are suggesting in followup messages)

Joao