From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rik van Riel Subject: Re: 3.0.3 freeze Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 13:12:46 -0400 Message-ID: <44F3240E.7030301@redhat.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Keir Fraser Cc: Ian Pratt , xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, "Daniel P. Berrange" , veillard@redhat.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Keir Fraser wrote: > On 28/8/06 5:47 pm, "Rik van Riel" wrote: > >>> API/ABI compatibility is not guaranteed at the low-level control-plane >>> interfaces: that is instead provided at the XML-RPC level >> Which XML-RPC layer? >> >> The one that's not been written yet, or the one we were >> told would go away? :) > > http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XenApi > http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-api/ > > I.e., the one that's being drafted and discussed right now, on the xen wiki > and on the xen-api mailing list. Are you seriously suggesting that people rely on the stability of an API that hasn't even been created yet, and that people should not be surprised when the current API breaks, because they should have been using the one that doesn't exist yet? Words fail me. At least, words I'd want to write down :) -- What is important? What you want to be true, or what is true?