On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 03:10:58PM +0200, Kashyap Chamarthy wrote: > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 02:30:47PM +0200, Max Reitz wrote:
[...] > > The special behavior is that you can use block-job-cancel after > > BLOCK_JOB_READY to complete the job, but not pivot to it. I don't think > > we have a real plan on how to represent that with the generic job > > commands, we just know that we don't want to use job-cancel. > > Ah, thanks for clarifying. Yes, what you say makes sense — not using > 'job-cancel' to represent completion. > > > (Maybe we can add a flag to job-complete (which to me does not sound > > like a good idea), or you could set flags on jobs while they are > > running, so you can set a do-not-pivot flag on the mirror job before you > > complete it.) > > Yeah, spelling that out, 'do-not-pivot' or something along those lines, > as a flag makes it clearer. "Implicit is better than explicit". Oops, I got the quote reverse :P. Correct: "Explicit is better than implicit". But you've auto-corrected in your head already... -- /kashyap
