[dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 00/17] Single virtio implementation

[Ouyang, Changchun]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 9, 2014 2:12 PM
> To: Ouyang, Changchun
> Cc: Qiu, Michael; Stephen Hemminger; dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 00/17] Single virtio implementation
> 
> 2014-12-09 05:41, Ouyang, Changchun:
> > Hi
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Qiu, Michael
> > > Sent: Tuesday, December 9, 2014 11:23 AM
> > > To: Ouyang, Changchun; Thomas Monjalon; Stephen Hemminger
> > > Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 00/17] Single virtio
> > > implementation
> > >
> > > On 12/9/2014 9:11 AM, Ouyang, Changchun wrote:
> > > > Hi Thomas,
> > > >
> > > >> -----Original Message-----
> > > >> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com]
> > > >> Sent: Monday, December 8, 2014 5:31 PM
> > > >> To: Ouyang, Changchun
> > > >> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> > > >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 00/17] Single virtio
> > > >> implementation
> > > >>
> > > >> Hi Changchun,
> > > >>
> > > >> 2014-12-08 14:21, Ouyang Changchun:
> > > >>> This patch set bases on two original RFC patch sets from Stephen
> > > >> Hemminger[stephen at networkplumber.org]
> > > >>> Refer to
> > > >>> [http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-August/004845.html ] for
> > > >> the original one.
> > > >>> This patch set also resolves some conflict with latest codes and
> > > >>> removed
> > > >> duplicated codes.
> > > >>
> > > >> As you sent the patches, you appear as the author.
> > > >> But I guess Stephen should be the author for some of them.
> > > >> Please check who has contributed the most in each patch to decide.
> > > > You are right, most of patches originate from Stephen's patchset,
> > > > except for the last one, To be honest, I am ok whoever is the
> > > > author of this patch set, :-), We could co-own the feature of
> > > > Single virtio if you all agree with it, and I think we couldn't
> > > > finish Such a feature without collaboration among us, this is why
> > > > I tried to communicate
> > > with most of you to collect more feedback, suggestion and comments
> > > for this feature.
> > > > Very appreciate for all kinds of feedback, suggestion here,
> > > > especially for
> > > patch set from Stephen.
> > > >
> > > > According to your request, how could we make this patch set looks
> > > > more
> > > like Stephen as the author?
> > > > Currently I add Stephen as Signed-off-by list in each patch(I got
> > > > the
> > > agreement from Stephen before doing this :-)).
> > >
> > > Hi Ouyang,
> > >
> > > "Signed-off-by" should be added by himself, because the one who in
> > > the Signed-off-by list should take responsibility for it(like potential
> bugs/issues).
> > >
> > > Although, lots of patches are originate from Stephen, we still need
> > > himself add this line :)
> >
> > Hi Thomas,
> > It that right? I can't add Stephen into Signed-off-by list even if I
> > have gotten the agreement from Stephen, What 's the strict rule here?
> 
> Stephen sent the patches with his Signed-off, then you added yours.
> This is OK.
> Using git am, author would have been Stephen. To change author now, you
> can edit each commit with interactive rebase and "git commit --amend --
> author=Stephen".
> No need to resend now. Please check it for next version of the patchset.
> 

So I understand correctly, Stephen need care for from patches from 1 to 16,
I need care for the 17th patch from next version.
What I mean "caring for" above is:  debug and validate them and send out patches

Thanks
Changchun