On Thu, 2016-10-13 at 12:28 +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 13/10/16 12:01, Dario Faggioli wrote: > > "Just" as per the subject, I wrote feature documents for (almost) > > all our > > schedulers. No big deal, I'd say, apart from the fact that I'm > > declaring > > Credit2 **Supperted**, instead of experimental. > > Supperted? That's like supported right? ;p > Nah, 'supperted' is the new 'supported', didn't you know? :-P
> It is fine for you to propose that a feature should be upgraded to > supported, and this is probably the best way to formally do so. > > However, final agreement of a feature becoming supported should > include > input from the security team. (At the end of the day, it is us with > extra work if the feature isn't up to scratch.) > Ok, so, if that's the case, what's the process: resend (this patch) -- or some other kind of formal request-- with secur...@xenproject.org Cc-ed? Regards, Dario -- <<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
