From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <f.weber@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 52D3FB42D5
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri,  1 Dec 2023 10:57:10 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 3AFC714CFF
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri,  1 Dec 2023 10:57:10 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [94.136.29.106])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri,  1 Dec 2023 10:57:09 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 03C9A4356D
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri,  1 Dec 2023 10:57:09 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <0dc224c8-56bd-4548-bf77-2e0c11d5f4a9@proxmox.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2023 10:57:08 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
To: Wolfgang Bumiller <w.bumiller@proxmox.com>
Cc: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
References: <20230126083214.711099-1-f.weber@proxmox.com>
 <20230126083214.711099-5-f.weber@proxmox.com>
 <j6mownokk5d2f6uztchw23szzyiwztoh4aiffjjmgm2t4kahri@2hpu3a4mztnt>
From: Friedrich Weber <f.weber@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <j6mownokk5d2f6uztchw23szzyiwztoh4aiffjjmgm2t4kahri@2hpu3a4mztnt>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL -0.119 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 BAYES_00                 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
 DMARC_MISSING             0.1 Missing DMARC policy
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE    -0.01 -
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [RFC guest-common 4/4] guest helpers: add helper to
 overrule active tasks of a specific type
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2023 09:57:10 -0000

On 17/11/2023 13:53, Wolfgang Bumiller wrote:
> Patch itself LGTM, just a note on sending patch series in general:
> 
> If you number patches throughout a whole series rather than the
> individual repositories (as in, this one is labeled 4/4 instead of 1/1),
> it would be nice if the order also helps determine dependencies.

Makes total sense, I'll keep this in mind for the future.