[nvmewin] Update on patch review request for "logical mode"support

[Chang, Alex]

Thanks a lot, Paul.
I will be available next Tuesday.
 
Alex

________________________________

From: nvmewin-bounces at lists.openfabrics.org
[mailto:nvmewin-bounces at lists.openfabrics.org] On Behalf Of Luse, Paul E
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 9:27 AM
To: Robles, Raymond C; NVMe Open SourceMailing List
(mailto:nvmewin at lists.openfabrics.org); nvmewin at lists.openfabrics.org;
Robles, Raymond C
Subject: Re: [nvmewin] Update on patch review request for "logical
mode"support


OK, so I'm just about ready with mine but to be fair I think since I had
to essentially retract mine, Alex's should have been immediately
considered next so he doesn't have to rebase after waiting for me.  As
I'm the one who gave up 'the lock' I should have to rebase after him
 
So, Alex's is on deck and I'll go next.  I'll setup a meeting for next
Tue (assuming Alex can make it) so we can walk us through his code
changes and potentially we can cover mine during the meeting as well.
 
Thx
Paul
 
From: nvmewin-bounces at lists.openfabrics.org
[mailto:nvmewin-bounces at lists.openfabrics.org] On Behalf Of Robles,
Raymond C
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 3:35 PM
To: NVMe Open Source Mailing List
(mailto:nvmewin at lists.openfabrics.org); nvmewin at lists.openfabrics.org;
Robles, Raymond C
Subject: [nvmewin] Update on patch review request for "logical mode"
support
 
All,
 
Paul is in the process for updating his changes for the logical mode
support in the driver.  So please *disregard* his previous patch review
request.  He will send another patch review request out as soon as he
completes the updates he is currently making and then we can continue
with the review process.
 
One quick item I did want to address was the patch request review
process.  As we agreed upon in our first official meeting, the review
process will take place over the reflector for anyone wishing to review
changes.  However, the only requirement is that we get feedback from one
representative from the 3 core dev companies (IDT, LSI, Intel).
 
One additional item I'd like to point out is that if there is currently
a patch review change in progress, then please refrain from sending out
a second (or third, etc...) patch review request.  This is for a couple
of reasons:
 
1)     If a patch request is already outstanding, then any new patches
*must* wait so that their code base is rebased with the newly accepted
patch (once reviewed and check in) prior to submitting the next patch
request.  This step cannot be done until the current outstanding patch
has been reviewed and check in.  This is to prevent any issues that may
arise from not having the latest code (which may affect new changes) to
work with for any change that want to be pushed into the baseline.
2)     The person sending the subsequent patch review request, would
have to rebase their code against the new baseline anyways and then send
out a second patch review request with the latest code (plus their own
changes).
 
So for now, please wait on Paul's next patch review request to be sent
out.  Once that is reviewed and checked in, Alex (IDT) can then rebase
his changes and then re-submit his patch review request to the reflector
for review.
 
Thanks,
Ray
 
 
Raymond C. Robles
Platform Solutions Group | DCSG | IAG
Intel Corporation
Desk: 480.554.2600
Mobile: 480.399.0645
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openfabrics.org/pipermail/nvmewin/attachments/20120125/3264dbad/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1756 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://lists.openfabrics.org/pipermail/nvmewin/attachments/20120125/3264dbad/attachment.png>