On Mon, 10 Jun 2013 10:15:35 +0800 Qiao Nuohan <qiaonuo...@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> On 06/05/2013 10:15 AM, Luiz Capitulino wrote: > > I can review it until the end of this week. If this series is adding a new > > argument (which I believe is what it does) then there's only two ways > > to get this merged: either we wait for full introspection or you add this > > feature as a new command. > > > > I'd prefer to wait for full introspection, but it depends how long it's > > going to take to get it merged and how much time you're willing to wait. > > > > Amos, can you give us an update on that work? > > Hi Luiz, > > I would like to get these patches reviewed first. If introspection won't take > too much time, I will choose to wait. However, I cannot figure out how long it > will take, why not get the parts not related to introspection settled first? What do you mean by "settled"? We can keep the review cycle going, but to merge this we have two options: we wait for the full introspection or we make this a different command. > Seems Amos's draft will not change qapi-schema.json. The point of Amos series is discovery, not conflicts. If we merge your series w/o introspection support, then it's impossible for a mngt app like libvirt to know whether or not a given QEMU version supports your new argument.