On 06/25/2014 12:42 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote: > On 24.06.2014 21:34, Eric Blake wrote: >> On 06/24/2014 03:39 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >> >>>> >>>> We also have a <features> subelement of <guest> in the <capabilities> >>>> XML which is used for a similar thing although it doesn't support a >>>> per-machine-type output, only per-binary capabilities. Should we add >>>> this more granular approach and abandon the old one? >>> >>> Yes, we should stop adding stuff related to the guest to the main >>> <capabilities> XML since it doesn't scale. >> >> Oh phooey - I just proposed yet another feature there: >> https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2014-June/msg01097.html >> >> I'd like to turn on a witness for active commit support in the same >> release as we turn on the qemu implementation (and I'm hoping it still >> makes libvirt 1.2.6 - we haven't frozen yet, but it's near the end of >> the month, and we're still waiting on some patches to make it into >> qemu.git). If <features> is not the right place, then where should I >> advertise it? >> > > I'm working on another version, but I'm not sure if I'll prepare patches > prior to freeze. How critical is the active commit? I mean, can it wait > a while (with possibility of slipping upcoming release)? Well, active commit implementation is also stalled waiting on qemu; although the API has been pushed already. I'm still playing it by ear for a couple more days, even if it means some of my patches go in (possibly with tweaks) after we freeze. -- Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list