On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 08:23:01AM -0500, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > > In this case, this protocol addition is local-only, and has only been > > tested by few people, which does not make me very comfortable with > > setting it in stone right now. So I'm asking if we should mark this as > > This is fud, like most protocol additions, when it's added, it has been tested by very few people. To me, the difference is that usually, the protocol additions have been either minor, or for 'non-core' features. Here we have a major change in the way display is handled, but still, this work is only partial, as it's local only for now, so yes my feeling is that we should be extra careful with this. > > > experimental somehow (but I don't have great suggestions about the > > 'how'). > > If we had such a process, but I don't think it's necessary to create one for these messages. Does this mean you are 99.999% sure that in 3 years from now we'll still be happily using these messages? Christophe
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel