[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 1/2] qapi: Rename QMP and QGA schema files
From: |
Eric Blake |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 1/2] qapi: Rename QMP and QGA schema files |
Date: |
Fri, 20 Apr 2018 07:42:57 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0 |
On 04/20/2018 03:01 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Eric Blake <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Having two files in the tree both named qapi-schema.json just adds
>> confusion. Rename these files to {qmp,qga}-schema to make it
>> obvious which schema is in effect, and relocate qga into the common
>> qapi/ subdirectory. Update all build rules that refer to the file
>> names, and adjust other documentation and comment references that
>> need to refer to the new file names.
>>
>> Maintainer-wise, this means that qapi/qga-schema.json continues
>> to belong to Michael as QGA maintainer, but now also notifies
>> Markus and Eric as QAPI maintainers, alongside all the other
>> QMP QAPI files, matching how other .json QAPI modules belong
>> to multiple maintainer blurbs. Also, fix a stale reference to
>> a file removed in commit eb815e248f.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <address@hidden>
>
> We have three separate things: QAPI infrastructure, its use in QEMU
> proper, and its use in QGA. We keep the former two in qapi/, and the
> latter in qga/.
And another thread raised the possibility of firmware.json (or
firmware.qapi, if we like patch 2) being in yet another directory.
>
> Giving the two qapi-schema.json different names is fine with me.
> qga-schema.json is an obvious choice. qmp-schema.json less so, because
> it's actually used for more than just QMP now. qemu-schema.json? Or
> just keep the old name?
qapi-schema.qapi sounds repetitive; qemu-schema.qapi seems reasonable,
if we need it. Also, remember that we have the QMP command
'query-qmp-schema', so the name qmp-schema makes some sense, even if the
file does cover more than QMP.
>
> Splitting qapi/ into infrastructure and use now doesn't seem to be worth
> the bother. I'd prefer to keep the use for QGA separate, though. The
> case for moving them together would be stronger if they shared schema
> parts. Matter of taste, I guess, and that means it's up to the QGA
> maintainer. Michael?
>
> If we decide to keep them separate, but still want MAINTAINERS' QAPI
> Schema stanza to cover QGA, that's a one-liner.
>
--
Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3266
Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature