-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 01/04/2015 14:33, Eric Blake wrote: > It's only a minor incompatibility, but a client that hard-codes > itself to parsing "returns":0 (that is, expecting a json-number) > will fail when talking to an older qemu that provided a json-object > instead; while a client that expects a json-object always and can > search for a "key":0 integer pair within that object that may or > may not be present (we already document that clients MUST be > prepared for dictionary members to be optional, but do NOT advise > that clients must be prepared for a change between fundamental JSON > types). Yes, the backwards-incompatibility is a weak argument, but > as my pending series will be requiring all new commands to > whitelist a non-dict return, we might as well avoid making this > another case for that whitelist. That's true, and we might take the opportunity to return the number of trimmed bytes separately for each filesystem. Justin, would you like to take a shot at that, or just submit a new version that doesn't include the change to the return value? Thanks, Paolo -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJVHCGwAAoJEL/70l94x66DuMcH/1Sb013BWNwot+I0jhMEr7jF WgaXQgIAVlxtrzspuE4cXF/TszCie/G1cGlF2oLP+GkJVivbAJFqJYNZcNDfE2Ti OdfhyUCgYMhOYUG81IXIbwXlGca/RhuDW74+B+tEL9dnoissI4l5JWS+k4bWK3On Pgu3gmIcLtQKTxUeDi93K25OAZNJJ9mLmf8CF4FAOUv3C5T4SN5tSkSEqQSB52by zKcM4+cXg5fzYH5OLo6d2SEUqsUHoEVh75VKLb38vAYm3GuNcuVoMEnlSELc3nTo A8Zrmc7swjZXqaZ6iRaXz7seiJ69XrfNWGqY+s0rGZoUK3z8/LwGSpDgmAY3pVQ= =Goct -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----