On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 02:13:58PM +0200, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote:
> The 03/09/13, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>
> > Err, what API changes are you talking about ? Both the libvirt C API,
> > and any language bindings, including the python, are intended to be long
> > term stable APIs. We only ever a
On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 01:27:50PM +0200, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote:
> The 29/08/13, Eric Blake wrote:
> > On 08/29/2013 05:24 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > >
> > > I don't think these issues are going to go away, in fact I think they
> > > will likely become more pressing, until the point where
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 03:27:42PM +0800, Daniel Veillard wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:24:41PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > As everyone knows, we have historically always shipped the python binding
> > as part of the libvirt primary tar.gz distribution. In some ways that has
> > simp
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 09:44:26AM +0200, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> On 29.08.2013 13:24, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > As everyone knows, we have historically always shipped the python binding
> > as part of the libvirt primary tar.gz distribution. In some ways that has
> > simplified life for peop
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 10:18:19AM +0200, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 03:27:42PM +0800, Daniel Veillard wrote:
> > On the other hand moving to a separate repo would likely lose our git
> > history
> > (not sure if we can keep it, i doubt) which would be a bummer IMHO.
>
>
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 10:18:19AM +0200, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 03:27:42PM +0800, Daniel Veillard wrote:
> > On the other hand moving to a separate repo would likely lose our git
> > history
> > (not sure if we can keep it, i doubt) which would be a bummer IMHO.
>
>
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 03:27:42PM +0800, Daniel Veillard wrote:
> On the other hand moving to a separate repo would likely lose our git history
> (not sure if we can keep it, i doubt) which would be a bummer IMHO.
You can use git filter-branch to extract the python bindings (assuming it's self
co
On 29.08.2013 13:24, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> As everyone knows, we have historically always shipped the python binding
> as part of the libvirt primary tar.gz distribution. In some ways that has
> simplified life for people, since we know they'll always have a libvirt
> python that matches thei
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 03:27:42PM +0800, Daniel Veillard wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:24:41PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > As everyone knows, we have historically always shipped the python binding
> > as part of the libvirt primary tar.gz distribution. In some ways that has
> > simp
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:24:41PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> As everyone knows, we have historically always shipped the python binding
> as part of the libvirt primary tar.gz distribution. In some ways that has
> simplified life for people, since we know they'll always have a libvirt
> pyt
On Thu, 2013-08-29 at 12:24 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> In OpenStack, in particular, their development and test environments aim
> to be able to not rely on any system installed python packages. They use
> a virtualenv and pip to install all python deps from PyPi (equivalent of
> Perl's CPA
On 08/29/2013 05:24 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>
> I don't think these issues are going to go away, in fact I think they
> will likely become more pressing, until the point where some 3rd party
> takes the step of providing libvirt python bindings themselves. I don't
> think we want to let ours
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 6:24 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> In RHEL world too, bundling of libvirt + its python binding is causing
> pain with the fairly recent concept of "software collections"[2]. This
> allows users to install multiple versions of languages like Python, Perl,
> etc on the sam
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 02:50:22PM +0200, Jiri Denemark wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:24:41 +0100, Daniel Berrange wrote:
> ...
> > IMHO we should / must listen to our users here before it is too late.
> >
> > We can still release libvirt python at the same time as normal libvirt
> > release
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:24:41 +0100, Daniel Berrange wrote:
...
> IMHO we should / must listen to our users here before it is too late.
>
> We can still release libvirt python at the same time as normal libvirt
> releases, and require that people update the bindings whenever adding
> new APIs (
As everyone knows, we have historically always shipped the python binding
as part of the libvirt primary tar.gz distribution. In some ways that has
simplified life for people, since we know they'll always have a libvirt
python that matches their libvirt C library.
At the same time though, this pol
16 matches
Mail list logo
