On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 12:43:06PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > And Ubuntu have already shipped a product with a patch using this syntax > applied, so we can't reasonably change it.
I refuse to be bound by such arguments. We just can't accept this, if someone ships a mofified version before it got agreed upon upstream, they perfectly well know that they are putting their users at risk and will have to sort the mess later. That's the rule of development in our whole ecosystem. A patch has to be reviewed by its technical merits. If someone ships a patched version and upstream uses something different in the end they will have to keep another patch to preserve the compatibility. People should push things here quickly, if we are not quick enough, feel free to complain publicly, but please don't play with the end users. Daniel -- Red Hat Virtualization group http://redhat.com/virtualization/ Daniel Veillard | virtualization library http://libvirt.org/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/ -- Libvir-list mailing list Libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
