On 11/03/2011 04:37 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: > >>>>>> 2. Proposed spec patch, kernel change, qemu change >>>>>> 3. Buy-ins from spec maintainer, kernel driver maintainer, qemu >>>>>> device >>>>>> maintainer (only regarding the ABI, not the code) >>>>> >>>>> I don't think this is how it's working today. I would be happy >>>>> with a >>>>> flow like this. >>>> >>>> If Michael and Rusty agree, we can adopt it immediately. >>>> >> >> If I understand the proposal, what is suggested is that >> all of spec, kvm and virtio patches are posted on list and >> acked before merging any one of them? >> >> Sure, this makes sense. > > Well, what's needed before the spec is changed is an interesting > question, but I think the main thing is, don't commit any virtio ABI > changes to vhost, QEMU, NKT, or the kernel until the spec for the > change has been committed. > > It would be nice to have a working implementation before committing a > spec change. Even nicer would be to have Acked-by's a maintainer in > each area affected. > Those are steps 2 and 3 of the proposed process. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
