>Hi Laurent, Hi Wouter,
>For nontrivial patches, I prefer if you could send them to this >mailinglist, so they can be more easily reviewed. I'm sorry about the No problem, I was just playing with "request pull" feature of githup... For the list readers, we are speaking about: http://github.com/vivier/nbd/commit/105e2f7299baf0e8eb1976e51f2c4907dd0250cd >delay last time; I'll try to be better in the future. No problem. >Anyway. General note: this seems to run amiss of the "if it ain't >broken, don't fix it" mantra. Also, I'm not 100% sure I think it's a >good idea to move nbd-server to one API for command line parsing, and >nbd-client to another (I had finally synchronized them in that regard >:-) > >But I'm willing to go past all that if there's a compelling reason, of >course. What'd be the most important advantage? I agree with all, I just try to make some cleanup. There is really no problem with me if you think this patch (or other) is not "good". I try, you can accept or not. My current goal is only readability... >Also: > >+ { "output-config", 'o', 0, G_OPTION_ARG_FILENAME, >+ &outputconfig, "output a config file section for what you " >+ "specified on the command line, with the specified section " >+ "name", >+ NULL }, > >That should probably be G_OPTION_ARG_STRING instead. I agree. But should I drop it to trash or not ? Regards, Laurent -- --------------------- [email protected] --------------------- "Tout ce qui est impossible reste à accomplir" Jules Verne "Things are only impossible until they're not" Jean-Luc Picard ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Start uncovering the many advantages of virtual appliances and start using them to simplify application deployment and accelerate your shift to cloud computing. http://p.sf.net/sfu/novell-sfdev2dev _______________________________________________ Nbd-general mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nbd-general
