From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Nq6hV-0003Iq-0S
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 12 Mar 2010 10:22:57 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=58048 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Nq6hU-0003IX-Jo
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 12 Mar 2010 10:22:56 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim
	4.60) (envelope-from <lcapitulino@redhat.com>) id 1Nq6hP-0004So-8o
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 12 Mar 2010 10:22:54 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:53818)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <lcapitulino@redhat.com>) id 1Nq6hO-0004S3-6W
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 12 Mar 2010 10:22:50 -0500
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 12:22:41 -0300
From: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Ideas wiki for GSoC 2010
Message-ID: <20100312122241.5cf41093@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <1268406691.3287.6.camel@aglitke>
References: <20100310183023.6632aece@redhat.com>
	<1268406691.3287.6.camel@aglitke>
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: Adam Litke <agl@us.ibm.com>
Cc: jan.kiszka@siemens.com, aliguori@us.ibm.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, agraf@suse.de

On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 09:11:31 -0600
Adam Litke <agl@us.ibm.com> wrote:

> Hi Luiz.  Around the time when I introduced the new Asynchronous monitor
> command API we had talked about converting all commands to use this new
> API so that we can cut down on duplicate code paths and confusing code.
> I would like to propose this as a GSoC project idea.  Do you think it
> should stand as its own project or should we merge it into your "Convert
> Monitor commands to the QObject API" project?

 I think it's a project by itself, but I wonder if it's too easy/short
for GSoC. An experienced programmer can do the conversion plus testing
in a day or two. There are probably a number of cleanups and adaptions
that can take more, but still seems too short.