On Mon, 2016-11-28 at 21:53 -0500, Laine Stump wrote:
> it was too late in
> the day to have a discussion with him about his question here:
> He didn't give a NACK for putting that function in now (rather than
> using stat() directly), but also didn't give an ACK.
I did neither ACK nor NACK because I was wondering if the
approach you took, which is completely fine as far as the
specific functionality you are implementing is concerned
(should have stressed this fact more in my reply), was the
best one going forward, and wanted to discuss that with you.
What I failed to take into account is the fact that *you*
were on your PTO and, by the time you got back, *I* would
be on mine :(
But I see Eric helpfully jumped in and provided more positive
feedback that, along with my lack of NACK, convinced you to
push. That's great! We can discuss about this more in due
time, but there was really no reason to leave this feature
out of the release for what is just an implementation detail.
> P.S. to Andrea - I will write a NEWS file entry, but I guess that can be
> safely pushed after Daniel freezes :-)
You better! ;)
Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization
libvir-list mailing list