On Thu, 2016-10-27 at 16:01 +0100, George Dunlap wrote: > On 25/10/16 09:18, Dario Faggioli wrote: > > All this being said, what's the next step? Is there anything more I > > should do, here in this thread? Should we wait for other people to > > weigh in? Should I resend this patch, with a non empty commit > > message? > > Containing what, a summary of this? > > Well I think that in the absence of official rules, we have to make > things up as we go along. > Fine with me. :-)
> I think to get this enabled now requires someone to send a patch with > the justification (both from a support/reliability standpoint and > from a > security standpoint) in the commit message. If we get a REST > Maintainer's Ack and no objections, then it should go in (subject to > the > release coodinator, of course). > Ok. > Do you want to send such a patch, or would you prefer it if I tried > to > write something up? > I'd like to give it a try myself. Thanks and 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
