Anthony Liguori <anth...@codemonkey.ws> writes: > On 07/26/2010 02:19 PM, Avi Kivity wrote: >>> Is what we are supporting just what libvirt expects there to be or >>> what any tool out there expects there to be? >> >> We should try to support all users, prioritized by the number of end >> users they represent. If this patch broke some other large user >> we'd be in a bind. But likely this isn't the case so we aren't. > > As I've said, I'm pragmatic and that's why I've argued for these > changes in the past. But libvirt should have changed a long time ago > to using something more reliable (like version).
You want pragmatic? I can give you pragmatic! We apply the trivial patch that helps libvirt and hurts nobody, and save our breath & typing for designing and implementing a capability system. [...]
