On Mon, 2015-11-16 at 13:30 +0100, Juergen Gross wrote: > On 16/11/15 13:09, Ian Campbell wrote: > > On Thu, 2015-11-12 at 13:01 +0000, Wei Liu wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 04:19:24PM +0100, Juergen Gross wrote: > > > > On 10/23/2015 03:04 PM, Juergen Gross wrote: > > > > > This series is a combination of my previous patches: > > > > > > > > > > "libxc: remove most of tools/libxc/xc_dom_compat_linux.c" > > > > > "tools: remove unused wrappers for python" > > > > > > > > > > I have split it up as requested by Ian Campbell, thus it consists > > > > > of > > > > > 13 patches instead just of 2, but the functionality is roughly > > > > > the > > > > > same. I have just kept more python bindings compared to the first > > > > > version, as there have been reports of some out of tree uses. > > > > > Asking > > > > > for more such use case on xen-devel and xen-user didn't result in > > > > > requests for more interfaces to be kept, so I delete them. > > > > > > > > There have been acks and critical responses regarding this series. > > > > Have there? I don't have the stashed alongside the series as I would > > normally, so maybe I've missed them? > > At least on #xendevel there was a rather clear statement towards not > removing code without any need, even if unused. This statement has not > been rejected by others.
Part of me thinks that such statements made on #xendevel may as well not have been made as far as the formal review process goes. But... > I still think the python wrappers used by nobody are something we > should get rid of, OTOH I don't want to fight really hard for it. :-) ... I think this is the right approach when dealing with such removals, i.e. to try and abort upon valid complaints. Ian. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel