On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 03:25:08PM +0100, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
> > And then I made concrete suggestions
> > as how I would move forward with this patch…
>
> Sorry, I saw your push back, but I did not see the concrete suggestion for
> moving forward… Would you please be kind enough to rep
> On 15 Feb 2018, at 13:47, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 01:14:43PM +0100, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 15 Feb 2018, at 10:19, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 11:24:50PM +0100, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
> O
On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 01:14:43PM +0100, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
>
>
> > On 15 Feb 2018, at 10:19, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 11:24:50PM +0100, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> On 14 Feb 2018, at 14:35, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> On 15 Feb 2018, at 10:19, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 11:24:50PM +0100, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 14 Feb 2018, at 14:35, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
>>>
>>> This one sounds more like an RFC to me
>>
>> Well, this is really a bug fix in the documen
On Wed, 2018-02-14 at 23:24 +0100, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
> > On 14 Feb 2018, at 14:35, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
> >
> > This one sounds more like an RFC to me
>
> Well, this is really a bug fix in the documentation more than a RFC.
>
> > , as from a quick look in server/,
> > this is n
On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 11:24:50PM +0100, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
>
>
> > On 14 Feb 2018, at 14:35, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
> >
> > This one sounds more like an RFC to me
>
> Well, this is really a bug fix in the documentation more than a RFC.
>
> > , as from a quick look in server/,
> On 14 Feb 2018, at 14:35, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
>
> This one sounds more like an RFC to me
Well, this is really a bug fix in the documentation more than a RFC.
> , as from a quick look in server/,
> this is not the style currently in use.
As I pointed out in earlier discussions, this s
This one sounds more like an RFC to me, as from a quick look in server/,
this is not the style currently in use.
Christophe
On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 12:25:31PM +0100, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
> From: Christophe de Dinechin
>
> As written, the headers style guide looks quite wrong. In partic
From: Christophe de Dinechin
As written, the headers style guide looks quite wrong. In particular,
it places headers in an order that makes it hard to detect hidden
dependencies in SPICE headers.
These rules can be enforced by the .clang-format proposed in earlier patch,
locally if you use the E
