On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 9:11 PM, Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 06:43:59PM +0200, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote: >> On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 01:39:58AM +0200, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote: >> >> From: "Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)" <zeeshanak@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> >> >> RHEL6 requires 512MB, not 256 as per documentation: >> >> >> >> http://www.redhat.com/resourcelibrary/articles/articles-red-hat-enterprise-linux-6-technology-capabilities-and-limit >> >> >> >> Thanks to Christophe Fergeau for pointing this one out as well. >> >> >> >> Pushed under trivial rule. >> > >> > NACK, this only addresses half of the review comments. >> >> The only other comment it doesn't address was "I'd also set >> recommended to 1GB." which sounds like more a light suggestion and >> since the recommended memory *is* already 1GB, I didn't see what I was >> supposed to do. > > Please note the choice of words "address". Explaining why the > change is not relevant is a way of addressing this comment. And the fact > that you wrongly thought that it's already set to 1GB shows that the change > was not so trivial. Dude, I made a mistake and was under the impression that you were suggesting something that doesn't make any sense. The change was still trivial. >> > As this is the 3rd time in a row one of your 'pushed under trivial rule' >> > patches need work, please think twice in the future before pushing >> > something under this rule. >> >> As long as it doesn't break anything, things can always be improved. >> No need to have long discussion about such small matters. > > It's not about having long discussions, it's just about getting code > reviewed and right before pushing it. Sure, all but trivial changes go through that process. One can always make mistakes with trivial changes too but thats no big deal as they could be corrected afterwards as was demonstrated in this case. No kitties were killed. -- Regards, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) FSF member#5124 _______________________________________________ Libosinfo mailing list Libosinfo@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libosinfo
