On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > ----- Исходное сообщение ----- >> On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 2:37 PM, Daniel P. Berrange >> <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > Zeeshan pointed me at this thread >> > >> > https://www.redhat.com/archives/libosinfo/2012-December/msg00174.html >> > >> > asking whether I thought it is better for the OsinfoInstallConfig >> > class to have a 'config-params' property (as per that patch), or >> > a more general 'install-script' property. >> > >> > Of course I thought it should have neither! IMHO the whole design >> > is >> > overly convoluted. The InstallScript class is creating a copy of >> > the >> > InstallConfig object instance, passing in the InstallScript so that >> > the new InstallConfig object can have a 'config-params' set >> > associated >> > with it. This is so that the InstalLScript can then use that to >> > apply >> > datamap translations. >> > >> > This is all complete overkill - the InstallScript class already has >> > info about the datamaps and can apply them to the original >> > InstallConfig >> > object instance it has, without needing to create a throwaway copy. >> >> Agreed. > > Well, you insisted on the creation of the throw away copy which was not there initially... As alternative to your approach of having config-params on InstallConfig. -- Regards, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) FSF member#5124 _______________________________________________ Libosinfo mailing list Libosinfo@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libosinfo
