On 9/9/08 11:35, "Gavin Maltby" <Gavin.Maltby@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Keir Fraser wrote:
>> You can hardly expect to do work in private and then 'surface the submarine'
>> when others post patches and expect them to do the work to merge with you.
>> If Intel's patches look acceptable then they will be checked in and Sun will
>> have to do the merge work to get any extra enhancements or features in their
>> patchset to work on top. That is unless you can see strong reason why Sun's
>> patches are technically better.
>
> Agreed. Sun and Intel have exchanged a few loose emails on our intentions
> in this area, but no close coordination. We (Sun) aren't expecting
> to try to contribute ours as patches to xen-unstable straight-away
> as we have a broader project to float first, and we also have to
> take our 3.1.4-based work up to the xen-unstable base. So by
> all means take in the Intel patch - we have no objections
> (although we might feel differently when next our base is
> updated to a later Xen release!). I've asked the author of the
> Sun work to have a look at this proposed patch to see how it
> fits with our work.
Sounds good to me!
 Cheers,
 Keir
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel