Hypermail

From: Krzysztof Oledzki <ole#ans.pl>
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 03:03:12 +0100 (CET)

On Sat, 1 Mar 2008, Willy Tarreau wrote:

> On Sat, Mar 01, 2008 at 05:35:52AM +0100, Krzysztof Oledzki wrote:

>>
>>
>> On Fri, 29 Feb 2008, Willy Tarreau wrote:
>>
>> <CUT>
>>>> BTW: there is one more unhandled patch: "Prevent redispatcher from
>>>> selecting the same server, version #3". ;)
>>>
>>> OK, I had some confusion initially about this one because I thought it
>>> changed the behaviour to what you described in the second part of the
>>> changelog, which it apparently does not. I'll merge it.
>>
>> There are two different patches I'm afraid you have possibly mistaken:
>>  - "Don't increment server connections too much + fix retries"
>>  - "Prevent redispatcher from selecting the same server, version #3"
>>
>> The "second part of the changelog" comment applies to the fist one, not
>> the one I mentioned above.
>

> OK.

>
>> Sorry for the confusion, it seems I send too many patches on once.
>

> No, that's fine. The only thing to care about is not to speak about
> things unrelated to the patch in its accompanying changelog. Pure
> discussion about future changs should be either in a separate mail
> or before the git patch in the mail so that I can clearly differentiate
> it from the patch description itself.

I'll do my best. ;)

> Also, when you send multiple patches in a short time, do not hesitate
> to tell me if one of them is particularly important for you, because
> you need it merged first to advance, or it's an awful bug, etc... While
> I don't always have enough time to review and merge all patches at once,
> I certainly can focus on a specific one.

OK. However, they are not particularly important just noted that one of my patches is still unreviewed and possibly overlooked.

Best regards,

Krzysztof Olêdzki Received on 2008/03/02 03:03

Re: [PATCH] proto_uxst rework -> SNMP support