On 02/16/2017 01:24 AM, Jim Fehlig wrote:
On 02/15/2017 05:06 PM, Joao Martins wrote:
On 02/15/2017 11:41 PM, Jim Fehlig wrote:
Joao Martins wrote:
Signed-off-by: Joao Martins <joao.m.martins@oracle.com> --- docs/news.xml | 10 ++++++++++ 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
diff --git a/docs/news.xml b/docs/news.xml index b756a97..b0629b5 100644 --- a/docs/news.xml +++ b/docs/news.xml @@ -53,6 +53,16 @@ was <code>virtio-net</code>. </description> </change> + <change> + <summary> + libxl: add tunnelled migration support + </summary> + <description> + Add tunnelled migration to libxl driver, which is always capable of + strong encryption and doesn't require any extra network connection + other than what's required for remote access of libvirtd. + </description> + </change> </section> <section title="Improvements"> <change>
Pushed, but only after realizing tunneled is misspelled :-(. No use perpetuating the misspelling of tunneled, so I've pushed a trivial followup.
Interesting, I didn't know that. Greping the whole repo for "tunnelled" and you will find a *lot* of matches:
$ git grep tunneled | wc -l 10 $ git grep tunnelled | wc -l 1242
So the incorrect spelling is used over 100x more than the correct one :-)
Hehe :D
Hmm, but the internets aren't really clear. Some hits say tunneled vs tunnelled being both correct.
Heh, as a native speaker I'm not sure which spelling is correct, but seem to recall a prior discussion on the list proclaiming 'tunneled'. If folks prefer I can revert the s/tunnelled/tunneled/ commit.
Sorry I may have mis-expressed myself before - didn't meant this being an issue. I was just curious about the word because I made that same mistake throughout the patches. Probably there's no need for revert with both appearing correct (as folks are suggesting in followup messages) Joao