From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43999) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ataDc-0001U5-7I for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 22 Apr 2016 08:29:59 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ataDW-0005Qa-Ha for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 22 Apr 2016 08:29:56 -0400 Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 13:29:37 +0100 From: "Daniel P. Berrange" Message-ID: <20160422122937.GH17478@redhat.com> Reply-To: "Daniel P. Berrange" References: <1461320695-31372-1-git-send-email-berrange@redhat.com> <1461320695-31372-2-git-send-email-berrange@redhat.com> <20160422105928.GC4237@noname.redhat.com> <571A0766.9030007@kamp.de> <20160422114340.GD17478@redhat.com> <20160422115347.GE4237@noname.redhat.com> <20160422115535.GE17478@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH for-2.6] block: add an 'iscsi-id' value to match -drive with -iscsi opts List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: Kevin Wolf , Qemu-block , Peter Lieven , QEMU Developers , Pino Toscano , Ronnie Sahlberg , Paolo Bonzini , John Ferlan On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 01:10:40PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 22 April 2016 at 12:55, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 01:53:47PM +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote: > >> -iscsi is a weird thing anyway. We should do things the usual way, with > >> a proper BlockdevOptionsIscsi QAPI structure. Introducing a new API in > >> 2.6 when we know we'll deprecate it again in 2.7 doesn't seem to make > >> that much sense. > >> > >> Plus, it's -rc4 now. The problem isn't a crash or a regression. It > >> merely means that you might need to wait for another release before you > >> can use iscsi. Pretty much the definition of a new feature. > > > > Ok, i thought that would probably be the response, but I wanted to be able > > to say I tried anyway, given it was for a libvirt security bug. We'll just > > have to a wait a bit longer to fix it for iscsi. > > OK, I have moved that item to "Not planned to be fixed for 2.6" in > the Planning page. Could you write a suitable note in the ChangeLog > page if you think it makes sense to do so, please? Yep, will do. Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|