From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] dpdk: enhance EXPERIMENTAL api tagging
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 13:36:27 +0100
Message-ID: <3928760.9ZWfWQzQIi@xps>
References: <20171201185628.16261-1-nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
 <9925007.qJ5tT5KyCr@xps>
 <20180131121836.GA23692@hmswarspite.think-freely.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
To: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com
 [66.111.4.27]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4437B1B786
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 31 Jan 2018 13:37:14 +0100 (CET)
In-Reply-To: <20180131121836.GA23692@hmswarspite.think-freely.org>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

31/01/2018 13:18, Neil Horman:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 05:15:01PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > 30/01/2018 16:54, Neil Horman:
> > > On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 10:46:27PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > > > 22/01/2018 02:48, Neil Horman:
> > > > > v5 Changes
> > > > > * Clean ups suggested by Thomas
> > > > 
> > > > There were a lot of new functions to tag when rebasing this v5.
> > > > Rebased and applied, thanks.
> > > > 
> > > Sorry, not clear what you mean by this.   Are you saying that there were several
> > > new experimental API's added recently that my initial set of tags missed?  If
> > > so, thanks for doing that.  I will also be sending another patch set soon, to
> > > reconcile API's that are documented as experimental but not listed in the
> > > version map as such
> > 
> > I meant that I have applied a lot of new experimental functions
> > after you sent the v5.
> > So I had to add the tag and CFLAGS for these new functions.
> > Usual rebase work.
> > 
> Understood, thank you.
> 
> > About reconciling experimental functions and map,
> > we should also consider upgrading some functions to non-experimental.
> > 
> I figured if I were to just do a reconcilliation of everything that is currently
> documented as experimental, that would be the impetus for their authors to yell
> at me about their not actually being experimental anymore, and I could fix that
> up in subsequent versions :)

OK, sounds like a plan.