Hi On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 6:56 PM Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lur...@redhat.com> wrote: > > Hi > > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 6:43 PM Frediano Ziglio <fzig...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > From: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lur...@redhat.com> > > > > > > A recent discussion about Spice URI scheme on the QEMU mailing list > > > with Gerd prompted me to make an effort to standardize the Spice URIs > > > usage. So far, it is mostly used and desribed in spice-gtk (see URI in > > > man/spice-client.pod). But it would be more appropriate as part of > > > spice-protocol. > > > > > > Based on the "vnc" URI Scheme > > > RFC (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7869), I sketeched a Spice URI > > > Scheme document, that should cover current URI usage in spice-gtk, and > > > should open up possibilities for future discussions and proposals. > > > > > > At some point, it would also be worthwhile to follow the "vnc" scheme, > > > and turn this into a IETF RFC and register with IANA etc. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lur...@redhat.com> > > > > I did read briefly and seems good. > > Why not putting in spice-common/docs so we can generate the HTML too > > easily? > > Whatever is the place to discuss a "common standard" works for me. > (spice-common is more about an implementation in my mind).
So what to decide? I still prefer spice-protocol, as this is the place I would expect that document & updates. -- Marc-André Lureau _______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
