qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH 0/5] linux-user changes to run docker


From: Takashi Yamamoto
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] linux-user changes to run docker
Date: Mon, 31 May 2021 11:45:06 +0900

On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 10:25 PM Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org> wrote:
>
>
> Takashi Yamamoto <yamamoto@midokura.com> writes:
>
> > On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 8:22 AM Takashi Yamamoto <yamamoto@midokura.com> 
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 2:49 AM Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamamoto@midokura.com> writes:
> >> >
> >> > > These patches, along with a few more hacks [1] I didn't include
> >> > > in this patchset, allowed me to run arm64 and armv7 version of
> >> > > dind image on amd64.
> >> > >
> >> > > [1] https://github.com/yamt/qemu/tree/linux-user-for-docker
> >> >
> >> > Might be worth posting those patches next time (even if they have a RFC
> >> > or !MERGE in the title for now).
> >>
> >> ok.
> >
> > while RFC is mentioned in eg. git format-patch --help,
> > i couldn't find what !MERGE is.
> > can you provide a reference?
>
> It's usually just an annotation to the subject line of the commit, e.g:
>
>   foo/bar: hacky fix to frobulator (!MERGE)
>
>   rest of commit message
>
> or something like:
>
>   baz/quack: invert the tachyon beam (WIP)
>
>   reason for the fix.
>
>   [AJB: still WIP as this breaks foo]
>
> AFAIK the only subject lines supported by the tooling are the squash:
> and fixup: prefixes.
>
> > is there a nice way to express that some patches in a post are meant
> > for application and the others are RFC?
>
> Aside from a description in the cover letter not really. The main reason
> to include patches that aren't ready for merging is to show where your
> work is going so the full context of earlier changes can be seen. Having
> an ALL CAPS tag in the subject line is just handy for the maintainer
> when scanning what might get cherry picked. Obviously if a patch totally
> breaks the build it's not worth including as it just makes review harder
> when giving the patches a spin so you should exercise your judgement.

ok. thank you for the explanation.

>
> --
> Alex Bennée



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]