From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52282) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ayfXX-0001s7-08 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 06 May 2016 09:11:37 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ayfXL-0007Ur-6l for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 06 May 2016 09:11:25 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:42746) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ayfXL-0007Rd-1Q for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 06 May 2016 09:11:19 -0400 Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA2823B752 for ; Fri, 6 May 2016 13:11:06 +0000 (UTC) From: Markus Armbruster References: <1462380558-2030-1-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com> <572A2C7D.7070501@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 06 May 2016 15:11:04 +0200 In-Reply-To: <572A2C7D.7070501@redhat.com> (Eric Blake's message of "Wed, 4 May 2016 11:08:13 -0600") Message-ID: <87mvo3z5zr.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] migration: Move qjson.[ch] to migration/, clean up List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Eric Blake Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, amit.shah@redhat.com, dgilbert@redhat.com, quintela@redhat.com Eric Blake writes: > On 05/04/2016 10:49 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> qjson.[ch] is a JSON writer used by migration. Eric proposed to >> replace it by common code in his "Add qapi-to-JSON and clone visitors" >> series. David's review led to the conclusion that migration would >> prefer to keep its own JSON writer, to better serve its requirements. >> PATCH 1 move it to its proper place, and explains why it exists in a >> bit more detail. PATCH 2 simplifies it a bit. > > Whose tree would this go in through? Migration is the natural choice. Would that inconvenience you? > At any rate, series: > Reviewed-by: Eric Blake > but see nit on 1/2 Perhaps the maintainer can add the commit hashes on merge. Thanks!