From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1M9hNt-0002V1-9m
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 28 May 2009 11:19:09 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1M9hNo-0002TG-Nr
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 28 May 2009 11:19:08 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=43001 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1M9hNo-0002T9-JC
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 28 May 2009 11:19:04 -0400
Received: from qw-out-1920.google.com ([74.125.92.149]:52861)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1M9hNo-0000TQ-Cn
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 28 May 2009 11:19:04 -0400
Received: by qw-out-1920.google.com with SMTP id 4so2762625qwk.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Thu, 28 May 2009 08:19:03 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4A1EAB61.10206@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 10:18:57 -0500
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/4] Split qcow2 driver
References: <1243519627-525-1-git-send-email-kwolf@redhat.com>
	<4A1EA236.2020203@codemonkey.ws> <4A1EA62C.9060103@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <4A1EA62C.9060103@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
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: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Cc: Mark McLoughlin <markmc@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Anthony Liguori schrieb:  
>   
>> Could you introduce a new qcow2 directory?  
>>     
>
> I certainly could, but don't you think this is a bit too much? I mean,
> block/ isn't really crowded and if we end up having a separate directory
> for each file I wouldn't call this a good directory structure either.
>
> Maybe we should wait for a few other opinions and then decide if a new
> directory is the way to go or not.
>   

Not a blocker since renaming is reasonable enough in git.  Just thought
it was worth bringing up since we're talking about reorganizing code for
better maintainability...

>> Perhaps add a README too
>> that we can use to start trying to store some information about how the
>> qcow2 driver works to help other people dive into it.
>>     
>
> That would obviously be a different patch, but in general documentation
> certainly wouldn't hurt. The very first thing to document would be the
> image format itself, before even starting with the driver.
>   

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

> Kevin
>