On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 02:55:27PM -0700, Eric Blake wrote: > On 01/20/2012 01:15 PM, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote: > > From 6895c107970ea6daf3d0e7f8be9a1a4e97b2278b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > From: "Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)" <zeeshanak@xxxxxxxxx> > > Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 21:50:35 +0200 > > Subject: [PATCH] Allow custom metadata in domain configuration XML > > > > Applications can now insert custom nodes and hierarchies into domain > > cofiguration XML. Although currently not enforced, application are > > required to use their own namespaces on every custom node they insert. > > Looks like an interesting idea, as it gives applications more structure > than what they would get by overloading the free-form <description>. > > > --- > > docs/formatdomain.html.in | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ > > src/conf/domain_conf.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++ > > src/conf/domain_conf.h | 3 +++ > > Hmm, you didn't update docs/schemas/domaincommon.rng. But how do you > write a schema that accepts a <metadata> element with arbitrary > contents? </me searches the web...> > > http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/relax-ng/tutorial.html#IDAFLZR > > <define name="anyElement"> > <element> > <anyName/> > <zeroOrMore> > <choice> > <attribute> > <anyName/> > </attribute> > <text/> > <ref name="anyElement"/> > </choice> > </zeroOrMore> > </element> > </define> > > <define name='metadata'> > <element name='metadata'> > <choice> > <text/> > <zeroOrMore> > <ref name='anyElement'/> > </zeroOrMore> > </choice> > </element> > </define> Yes, that looks fine. > > > + <dl> > > + <dt><code>metadata</code></dt> > > + <dd><code>metadata</code> node could be used by applications to > > + store custom metadata in the form of XML nodes/trees. Applications > > + must use custom namespaces on any XML nodes they insert here. > > + <span class="since">Since 0.9.9</span></dd> > > 0.9.10. > > > @@ -11833,6 +11841,19 @@ virDomainDefFormatInternal(virDomainDefPtr def, > > goto cleanup; > > } > > > > + /* Custom metadata comes at the end */ > > + if (def->metadata) { > > + xmlBufferPtr xmlbuf; > > + > > + xmlbuf = xmlBufferCreate(); > > + if (xmlNodeDump(xmlbuf, def->metadata->doc, def->metadata, 2, 0) < 0) { > > Is this the right level of indentation if buf itself already has > indentation (such as when <domain> is nested inside <domainsnapshot>? > You may need to use virBufferGetIndent() and use that to alter the > fourth argument to xmlNodeDump accordingly. > > Unless anyone else objects to this XML addition, I think it is probably > okay; but I have a couple caveats: FYI this XML design is something I suggested to the Boxes team, instead of hijacking the user's <description> field, so obviously it gets my vote. Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list