On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 6:47 PM, Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, May 02, 2012 at 06:35:07PM +0300, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote: >> On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > Having a per-feature GVirConfigObject seems overkill since it will >> > only be a string wrapper, and a GVirConfigObject wrapping just a string >> > with no node name identifying the type of the node is unusual. >> >> Thats only because I haven't added 2 possible getters of this object. >> We don't need them right now but they could be added when needed >> later. I have discussed this with Daniel and he and I both think this >> 'feature' deserves a separate class. > > What would be these getters apart from the already existing _get_name? The features under 'guest' can have boolean attributes, 'default' and 'toggle'. According to RNG and examples I have seen so far, 'feature' in the context can't have props but I recall Daniel said on IRC that the RNG is wrong and these nodes can have props too. Any ways, he suggests we keep a class for both 'feature's and I didn't see any harm in that. -- Regards, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) FSF member#5124 -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list