On 15/12/15 11:20, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 08:30:41AM +0100, Martin Kletzander wrote: >> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 09:31:33AM +0100, Erik Skultety wrote: >>> On 10/12/15 15:54, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >>>> On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 03:46:45PM +0100, Erik Skultety wrote: >>>>> Commmit df8192aa introduced admin related rename and some minor >>>>> (caused by automated approach, aka sed) and some more severe isues along with >>>>> it. First reason to revert is the inconsistency with libvirt library. >>>> >>>> We have release 1.3.0 with this header file, so IMHO we can't just >>>> rename the public APIs now. >>>> >>> Yes, I understand that Daniel and I know our policy, but what I thought >>> was that since it's still disabled and cannot be used properly (besides >>> editing the code and rebuilding upstream and still wouldn't do much), >>> there might be an exception to this...obviously, it's not, so at least >>> we could revert the client internal changes, I guess. >>> >> >> Yes, moreover the header file is not distributed yet, I took the >> precautions so that we can discuss API-incompatible changes for now and >> finally come to a conclusion about some of these details and move on. > > Ok, I'll withdraw my objection > >> Thinking about it over and over again, I'm probably OK with being >> consistent with the libvirt library even though I don't like it as >> much. One other thing to solve both naming problems, but it would add >> APIs that are not needed now, is to have virAdmConnectGetDaemon which >> would return virAdmDaemonPtr. But that might be getting too >> complicated. >> >> I would say that if nobody chimes in with another opinion (for, let's >> say, around a week) the safest way will be sticking with the naming >> that's consistent with libvirt library, despite the fact that I, >> personally, am not in favor of that. > > As a general rule I've a preference for consistent naming across > libvirt, as long as it doesn't result in mis-leading names. > > Regards, > Daniel > Since nobody raised another objection and it's been around a week (6 days to be exact) as Martin proposed, I pushed the revert. Merry Christmas, Erik -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list