From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:35388)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1SWTK2-0003Sh-C9
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 21 May 2012 10:11:00 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1SWTJv-0006RO-22
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 21 May 2012 10:10:53 -0400
Received: from mail-ob0-f173.google.com ([209.85.214.173]:42995)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1SWTJu-0006RF-SJ
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 21 May 2012 10:10:46 -0400
Received: by obbwd20 with SMTP id wd20so10291034obb.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 21 May 2012 07:10:44 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4FBA4CE0.2090702@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 09:10:40 -0500
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <4FB6821A.1080902@redhat.com>
	<20120521105901.4fbe7363@doriath.home>
In-Reply-To: <20120521105901.4fbe7363@doriath.home>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Proposal for extensions of block job commands in
 QEMU 1.2
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>
Cc: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>, aliguori@us.ibm.com, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Federico Simoncelli <fsimonce@redhat.com>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>

On 05/21/2012 08:59 AM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> On Fri, 18 May 2012 19:08:42 +0200
> Paolo Bonzini<pbonzini@redhat.com>  wrote:
>
>> Modified QMP commands
>> =====================
>
> As we have discussed on the ML, we're not going to extend QMP commands.
>
> I understand your reasoning, and since the beginning I thought this was
> something useful to do, but we've already settled for not doing this.
>
> I also think that we shouldn't have exceptions, as in practice this means
> we're extending commands anyway. So either, we do it or we don't.

Well, I think we should ask ourselves the following question:

How would a client figure out if the new options are available?

This is the primary reason for not extending existing commands.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

>