On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 05:07:23PM +0200, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> If I understood your current patch series correctly, >> OsinfoInstallConfig:config-params is not set before app generates the >> script so: >> >> 1. by the time OsinfoInstallConfig:config-params is set, >> OsinfoInstallConfig is unlikely to be useful to the app anymore. >> 2. it would be totally unintuitive for app to have access to >> OsinfoInstallConfig:config-params only after generating the script. >> >> Now if you want to revisit the decision to make >> osinfo_install_config_new_for_script() private, that is another thing. >> Otherwise, I really don't see what you want to achieve with exposing >> OsinfoInstallConfig:config-params in public API. > > Please read again the last paragraph of > https://www.redhat.com/archives/libosinfo/2012-December/msg00049.html > as well as > > https://www.redhat.com/archives/libosinfo/2012-December/msg00052.html Yikes, I had apparently missed those important bits somehow. My bad. As long as apps can choose between osinfo_install_config_new() or osinfo_install_config_new_for_script() without any issues/side-affects and we document (as you are doing in your patch) the difference clearly, I'm OK with these changes. -- Regards, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) FSF member#5124 _______________________________________________ Libosinfo mailing list Libosinfo@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libosinfo
