On 2016-07-20 12:38:47, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > On 20/07/16 at 19:12 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > > I would rather propose the reverse approach, that if a change is successful > > for cloud images, then it is a good idea to propose to extend it to more > > use cases. > > Note that to judge if a change is successful, its rationale should be > documented, so that you can derive a success metric from it. TTBOMK, the > rationale for those sysctl tunings is not documented. True but there are no also (with your exception) bug reports related to setting those up as they are and from what I know (but can't find it now) they ware users that required those changes. So in total we fixed something on users request and nobody complained about it, win-win for me. I don't know about correct form nor specific place for documenting such things, but I remember there was once an idea to have cloud team policy so maybe starting from 'cloud images' subsection is a good way to kick it off? -- |_|0|_| | |_|_|0| "Heghlu'Meh QaQ jajVam" | |0|0|0| -------- kuLa --------- | gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 0x58C338B3 3DF1 A4DF C732 4688 38BC F121 6869 30DD 58C3 38B3
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature