DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
To: Panu Matilainen <pmatilai@redhat.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] scripts: support any legal git revisions as abi validation range
Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2015 15:32:11 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2170557.zTAETIpyLV@xps13> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56659309.6010305@redhat.com>

2015-12-07 16:09, Panu Matilainen:
> On 12/03/2015 04:05 PM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> > In addition to git tags, support validating abi between any legal
> > gitrevisions(7) syntaxes, such as "validate-abi.sh -1 . <target>"
> > "validate-abi.sh master mybranch <target>" etc in addition to
> > validating between tags. Makes it easier to run the validator
> > for in-development work.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Panu Matilainen <pmatilai@redhat.com>
> > Acked-by: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
> > ---
> >
> > v2 changes:
> > - update usage and error messages to match new behavior
> > - update documentation too (as suggested by John McNamara)
> >
> 
> I started wondering why this didn't get applied along with the other 
> abi-validator changes and noticed this is sitting in patchwork in 
> "changes requested" state, which doesn't seem right: v2 added the 
> requested documentation.

It seems to be an error.

> The discussion around this patch did spur another request (ability to 
> pass parallel build flags to make) but that's entirely unrelated, so it 
> shouldn't hold up this one.

Yes

> I've no intention of sending a v3 of this patch because AFAIK there's 
> nothing to fix and the make-flags thing does not belong here, but 
> resetting the state to "new" by myself feels like cheating or something 
> :) So what's the correct action here? There's preciously little 
> documentation about expected patchwork workflow and such.

It's not cheating.
Changing patchwork status and send such an email looks to be the right thing
to do.

Yes maybe we can improve the contributing guide.

Thanks

  reply	other threads:[~2015-12-07 14:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-12-02 16:50 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] " Panu Matilainen
2015-12-02 18:23 ` Neil Horman
2015-12-03 12:14 ` Mcnamara, John
2015-12-03 13:28   ` Thomas Monjalon
2015-12-03 13:44     ` Panu Matilainen
2015-12-03 13:49       ` Richardson, Bruce
2015-12-03 15:46       ` Mcnamara, John
2015-12-03 13:39   ` Panu Matilainen
2015-12-03 13:41     ` Thomas Monjalon
2015-12-03 14:05 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Panu Matilainen
2015-12-07 14:09   ` Panu Matilainen
2015-12-07 14:32     ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
2015-12-07 16:08       ` Panu Matilainen
2015-12-07 22:38   ` Thomas Monjalon

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=2170557.zTAETIpyLV@xps13 \
    --to=thomas.monjalon@6wind.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=pmatilai@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).