From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NLgwI-0005vt-F9
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 12:48:30 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NLgwD-0005qH-Ko
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 12:48:29 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=34002 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NLgwD-0005q1-Br
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 12:48:25 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:19709)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <lcapitulino@redhat.com>) id 1NLgwC-0003j2-LK
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 12:48:25 -0500
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 15:48:05 -0200
From: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 5/7] QMP: Update spec file
Message-ID: <20091218154805.32b58702@doriath>
In-Reply-To: <4B2BBF7B.9070808@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
References: <1261149905-7622-1-git-send-email-lcapitulino@redhat.com>
	<1261149905-7622-6-git-send-email-lcapitulino@redhat.com>
	<m3skb89p1n.fsf@crossbow.pond.sub.org>
	<4B2BBF7B.9070808@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 11:44:27 -0600
Anthony Liguori <aliguori@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> Markus Armbruster wrote:
> > While I think these promises are appropriate for a mature version of the
> > protocol, I do not think we should make them for 0.12.
> >
> > We've just dreamed up version 0.1 of the protocol.  It hasn't been used
> > in anger.  Yes, we put some serious thought in it, and we even have
> > prototype code using it in libvirt, but let's face it, we're not
> > infallible: we *will* have to evolve stuff.
> >
> > Without a real user, there is no real need to constrict evolution of the
> > protocol in such a harsh way.  All it'll buy is is compatibility cruft.
> > Passage of time will bring us plenty of cruft without us setting
> > ourselves up for extras.
> >
> > Let's cut ourselves some slack here, please.
> >   
> 
> I've been working on the release notes and I was intending on announcing 
> the QMP support in 0.12 as a "preview" with full support in 0.13.
> 
> The idea being that we would try to maintain compatibility but "preview" 
> gives us enough slack that if we break it, we can at least claim that it 
> was just a preview ;-)

 Should I update the spec then?