Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 00/17] Single virtio implementation

["Ouyang, Changchun" <changchun.ouyang@intel.com>]

Hi Thomas,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]
> Sent: Monday, December 8, 2014 5:31 PM
> To: Ouyang, Changchun
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 00/17] Single virtio implementation
> 
> Hi Changchun,
> 
> 2014-12-08 14:21, Ouyang Changchun:
> > This patch set bases on two original RFC patch sets from Stephen
> Hemminger[stephen@networkplumber.org]
> > Refer to [http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-August/004845.html ] for
> the original one.
> > This patch set also resolves some conflict with latest codes and removed
> duplicated codes.
> 
> As you sent the patches, you appear as the author.
> But I guess Stephen should be the author for some of them.
> Please check who has contributed the most in each patch to decide.

You are right, most of patches originate from Stephen's patchset, except for the last one,
To be honest, I am ok whoever is the author of this patch set, :-),
We could co-own the feature of Single virtio if you all agree with it, and I think we couldn't finish
Such a feature without collaboration among us, this is why I tried to communicate with most of you 
to collect more feedback, suggestion and comments for this feature.
Very appreciate for all kinds of feedback, suggestion here, especially for patch set from Stephen. 

According to your request, how could we make this patch set looks more like Stephen as the author? 
Currently I add Stephen as Signed-off-by list in each patch(I got the agreement from Stephen before doing this :-)).
Need I send all patchset to Stephen and let Stephen send out them to dpdk.org?
Or any other better solution?
If you has better suggestion, I assume it works for all subsequent RFC and normal patch set.
 
Any other suggestions are welcome.

Thanks
Changchun