Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv5] add qemu-img convert -n option (skip target volume creation)

[Alex Bligh]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Eric,

On 30 Aug 2013, at 18:31, Eric Blake wrote:
>> 
>>     for(;;) {
>> -        c = getopt(argc, argv, "f:O:B:s:hce6o:pS:t:q");
>> +        c = getopt(argc, argv, "f:O:B:s:hce6o:pS:t:qn");
> 
> The order here...
> 
>>         if (c == -1) {
>>             break;
>>         }
>> @@ -1161,6 +1165,9 @@ static int img_convert(int argc, char **argv)
>>         case 'c':
>>             compress = 1;
>>             break;
>> +        case 'n':
>> +            skip_create = 1;
>> +            break;
> 
> ...and the order of the case statements, are unrelated.  Which makes
> maintenance a bit harder.  Personally, I like to keep my optstring in
> case-insensitive order, then my case statements in the same order.  But
> that's cosmetic, it doesn't affect the correctness of the patch.

I had also thought the order was unrelated, but closer inspection shows
that the ordering is 'similar'. If I'm going to roll another one, I'll
stick case 'n' after case 'q' and at least not make it any worse.

>> 
>> +++ b/tests/qemu-iotests/060
>> @@ -0,0 +1,101 @@
>> +#!/bin/bash
>> +#
>> +# test of qemu-img convert -n - convert without creation
>> +#
>> +# Copyright (C) 2009 Red Hat, Inc.
> 
> Where have you been the last 4 years?  I could understand a range of
> years, if this test borrows significantly from another file that old,
> but I suspect that just 2013 is probably more accurate.

I've been not at Redhat for any of it!

I wasn't too sure what to do with the copyright string. The body of
the code was copied from another test (058 if I remember rightly)
which had the above copyright string which is presumably that old.
Redhat don't have any copyright in the stuff I added so there is
no (c) Redhat newer than (presumably) 2009 (I'm presuming qemu
doesn't require contributor assignment). My copyright would be 2013.
But removing Redhat's (c) or altering it did not seem right.

I'm really not bothered about having my own string in there
particularly for such a meagre bit of code, but I suppose most
accurate would be:

  (c) 2009 Red Hat, Inc.
  (c) 2013 Alex Bligh

?

- -- 
Alex Bligh




-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.20 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org
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=iSLE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----