From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D6CBC433DF for ; Tue, 26 May 2020 15:27:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E5F7320723 for ; Tue, 26 May 2020 15:27:03 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="Sdv2AhkR" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org E5F7320723 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:49720 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jdbTr-0005bu-4L for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Tue, 26 May 2020 11:27:03 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:47764) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jdbSv-0004a7-95 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 May 2020 11:26:05 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-2.mimecast.com ([205.139.110.61]:42882 helo=us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jdbSt-0005ay-02 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 May 2020 11:26:05 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1590506761; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=jREFlH/qczP3NP3XobLxaTpbTh59eyZ+T5vq24t9Zqs=; b=Sdv2AhkRZz0Rn2h5mwv5yKcL3CdJ6GAp60UBpI9qJIPklIMF1g7T7AascwIt+9/owO2DeE xkFDANcLg0yl+ZzoHilPlC4nVgWEceNtWsitRmb1PvWWYvA+LdGFMnNhf8QNwlUMrD1WsX FO9RFGS9ZIvOqDwz5X4VPNotBiV8YVE= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-176-Ol0MYW3sMwe49sNKTZBZGA-1; Tue, 26 May 2020 11:25:59 -0400 X-MC-Unique: Ol0MYW3sMwe49sNKTZBZGA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 50A5D107ACCD; Tue, 26 May 2020 15:25:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (unknown [10.36.110.57]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 096AC79C2C; Tue, 26 May 2020 15:25:54 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 16:25:51 +0100 From: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= To: Philippe =?utf-8?Q?Mathieu-Daud=C3=A9?= Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 01/32] python/qemu: create qemu.lib module Message-ID: <20200526152551.GL2496524@redhat.com> References: <20200514055403.18902-1-jsnow@redhat.com> <20200514055403.18902-2-jsnow@redhat.com> <20b3fb10-8028-eb12-49a9-a3cc9dd45ed0@redhat.com> <07ff57d4-8348-4409-ca8a-ff4c5278b973@virtuozzo.com> <45dc0bb0-6b22-1703-0435-9d49d3df9978@redhat.com> <20200526152207.GK2496524@redhat.com> <169ab716-1013-e65b-be9f-9f73f65515c4@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <169ab716-1013-e65b-be9f-9f73f65515c4@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.13.4 (2020-02-15) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.11 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Disposition: inline Received-SPF: pass client-ip=205.139.110.61; envelope-from=berrange@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/05/26 01:14:47 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -10 X-Spam_score: -1.1 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FROM_EXCESS_BASE64=0.979, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= Cc: Fam Zheng , Kevin Wolf , Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy , Eduardo Habkost , qemu-block@nongnu.org, Alex =?utf-8?Q?Benn=C3=A9e?= , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Markus Armbruster , Cleber Rosa , Max Reitz , John Snow Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 05:23:42PM +0200, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: > On 5/26/20 5:22 PM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 08:27:54PM -0400, John Snow wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 5/18/20 3:33 PM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote: > >>> 18.05.2020 21:23, John Snow wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 5/18/20 2:14 PM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote: > >>>>> 14.05.2020 08:53, John Snow wrote: > >>>>>> move python/qemu/*.py to python/qemu/lib/*.py. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> To create a namespace package, the 'qemu' directory itself shouldn't > >>>>>> have module files in it. Thus, these files will go under a 'lib' > >>>>>> package > >>>>>> directory instead. > >>>>> > >>>>> Hmm.. > >>>>> > >>>>> On the first glance, it looks better to have > >>>>> > >>>>>    from qemu import QEMUMachine > >>>>> > >>>>> than > >>>>>      from qemu.lib import QEMUMachine > >>>>> > >>>>> why do we need this extra ".lib" part? > >>>>> > >>>>> Is it needed only for internal use? > >>>>> > >>>>> Assume we have installed qemu package. Can we write > >>>>> > >>>>>    from qemu import QEMUMachine > >>>>> > >>>>> ? Or we still need qemu.lib ? > >>>>> > >>>>> I don't remember any python package, which made me to write "import from > >>>>> package_name.lib ..." > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> It's a strategy to create "qemu" as a PEP420 namespace package; i.e. > >>>> "qemu" forms a namespace, but you need a name for the actual package > >>>> underneath it. > >>>> > >>>> "qemu.lib" is one package, with qmp, qtest, and machine modules. "qemu" > >>>> isn't really a package in this system, it's just a namespace. > >>>> > >>>> The idea is that this allows us to create a more modular rollout of > >>>> various python scripts and services as desired instead of monolithically > >>>> bundling them all inside of a "qemu" package. > >>>> > >>>> It also allows us to fork or split out the sub-packages to separate > >>>> repos, if we wish. i.e., let's say we create a "qemu.sdk" subpackage, we > >>>> can eventually fork it off into its own repo with its own installer and > >>>> so forth. These subpackages can be installed and managed separately. > >>>> > >>> > >>> Okay, I understand.. No real objections than. > >>> > >>> Still, maybe, everything should not go into lib, maybe something like > >>> > >>> qemu/vm/  - qmp, QEMUMachine, etc > >>> qemu/qtest/  - qtest > >>> > >>> would be more user friendly? But I'm not sure. I just thought that "lib" > >>> is too generic. > >>> > >> > >> lib is a very generic name, I agree. > >> > >> Splitting accel, qmp and QEMUMachine in one package and keeping qtest in > >> another is fine too. I'm not sure if I like "vm" for the name of that > >> core package, though. > >> > >> I want to avoid using "qemu/sdk" because I have some plans for trying to > >> generate and package a "real" SDK using that namespace. > >> > >> "devkit"? "testkit"? "core"? Naming things is always the worst part. > > > > I'd suggest "machine", as in > > > > from qemu.machine import kvm_available, QEMUMachine > > > > I wouldn't over-think the module naming as it has so little impact on > > the code usage - it usually only appears in the "import" statement. > > Don't forget linux-user binaries. That's why I suggested ".machine", as all the APIs there currently are focused on the machine emulators, and the linx-user binaries share essentially nothing in common with softmmu binaries in terms of control APIs / CLI config. We can add a "qemu.user" package later if we have stuff related to that to expose Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|