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 :) If DPDK community's Signed-off-by" rule is different from linux(qemu, etc.), please ignore my comment :) Thanks, Michael > Need I send all patchset to Stephen and let Stephen send out them to dpdk.org? > Or any other better solution? > If you has better suggestion, I assume it works for all subsequent RFC and > normal patch set. > > Any other suggestions are welcome. > > Thanks > Changchun > > > >
