On 7/17/19 4:05 PM, Eric Blake wrote: > On 7/17/19 2:21 PM, John Snow wrote: >>> >>> Is this worth squeezing into 4.1, to start the deprecation clock one >>> cycle earlier (on the grounds that the missing information for anonymous >>> nodes is a bug)? Or am I pushing the boundaries too far, where keeping >>> this as 4.2 material remains the best course of action? >>> >> >> Appealing option. If you think the deprecation plan is actionable enough >> for libvirt, I'm in favor. > > I know my code for scraping query-block output during > virDomainCheckpointGetXMLDesc(,VIR_DOMAIN_CHECKPOINT_XML_SIZE) that > reports the size of the bitmap to the end user hasn't landed yet, and > that appears to be the only client in libvirt of this information at the > moment; but it's not a problem for me to check introspection for where > to find it (as libvirt already has a good framework for scraping > introspection for other reasons). > Ah, well... rc1 was yesterday already, so actually I think it's probably just really too late to do this. --js -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
