Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/6] [VERY RFC] Migration Stream v2

[George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 04/14/2014 07:06 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 14/04/14 18:49, George Dunlap wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Andrew Cooper
> > <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On 10/04/14 11:42, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2014-04-09 at 19:28 +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> > > > > Some design decisions have been take very deliberately (e.g. splitting the
> > > > > logic for PV and hvm migration) while others have been more along the lines of
> > > > > "I think its a sensible thing to do given a lack of any evidence/opinion to
> > > > > the contrary".
> > > > Is there some indication of which is which?
> > > Not really, given the clean rewrite, and also that it is only partially
> > > complete.
> > >
> > > > Should we check in the desigh/spec which was previously posted as part
> > > > of this?
> > > I knew I forgot something...
> > >
> > > http://xenbits.xen.org/people/andrewcoop/domain-save-format-E.pdf
> > What did you imagine might constitute an "Optional" record?
> I did not opt for optional records, nor did I author them into the
> spec.
So sometimes tone is hard to read in an e-mail; your tone here seems a 
bit defensive, or at least rather strident; which seemed strange to me, 
but when I looked back at what I wrote, I realized that it could be read 
with a more sarcastic / biting tone than I intended.
So, I don't know if you read it that way, but if you did, sorry about 
the misunderstanding; I was just being curious.  :-)
And if you didn't mean your tone to be strident, or it was strident for 
some other reason, nevermind. :-)
 -George


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel