From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48424) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VF5cA-0008Bv-0H for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 29 Aug 2013 13:02:38 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VF5c5-0002UA-5B for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 29 Aug 2013 13:02:33 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:57921) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VF5c4-0002Tu-Tq for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 29 Aug 2013 13:02:29 -0400 Received: from int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.25]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r7TH2R0m031735 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 29 Aug 2013 13:02:27 -0400 Message-ID: <521F7EA2.90303@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 11:02:26 -0600 From: Eric Blake MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1374584606-5615-1-git-send-email-kwolf@redhat.com> <1374584606-5615-3-git-send-email-kwolf@redhat.com> <20130821033805.GA7028@amosk.info> <20130827155859.GP648@dhcp-200-207.str.redhat.com> <20130829095247.526626e5@redhat.com> <20130829160650.GA2435@dhcp-200-207.str.redhat.com> <20130829123315.63432366@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20130829123315.63432366@redhat.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="HBuNA11GSI45HMptgCggGgKCDj9poGvrQ" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 02/18] qapi-types.py: Implement 'base' for unions List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Luiz Capitulino Cc: Kevin Wolf , Amos Kong , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefanha@redhat.com, armbru@redhat.com This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --HBuNA11GSI45HMptgCggGgKCDj9poGvrQ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 08/29/2013 10:33 AM, Luiz Capitulino wrote: >>> >>> Strange, it appears on your pull request... But anyway, your series >>> made it into 1.6.0, so I think we'll need the missing patch in 1.6.1 = too? >> >> There's no user in 1.6 (or would we have a build failure) because I >> didn't merge blockdev-add, so I guess it doesn't matter. >=20 > I won't say it's a huge deal, but any downstreamers basing on 1.6 will > have a hard time if they backport blockdev-add or any future command > that my depend on this. Any downstreamers that plans to backport blockdev-add would also backport this as part of their efforts. I don't see that as any different from any other backport effort that includes requiring multiple non-contiguous pre-req patches. We don't need it on the 1.6 stable tree, and downstream is no worse for the wear. --=20 Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org --HBuNA11GSI45HMptgCggGgKCDj9poGvrQ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Public key at http://people.redhat.com/eblake/eblake.gpg Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJSH36iAAoJEKeha0olJ0Nq7MQH/3BpaK4bW9QmIrF9smrXy4HF pN/FrBrGCwdPANHctuMFrv/1NSqTmwndMs1iwvSj7Rz+DWB3WZT90EMd7wWleYTO PXqlh66NXfc2xSZ7aIGj580jMrp1LM4fMXGu/D5fh3B5ASs7/c1QYxco2lIrbvKC P2gn9jyKxqlNTqY7uc0DY4RmV05mfWTslC21sY5e4UCycZLpTHpUunBWe3Ff97+1 gN3LdcEb4Bc/OO31u8dT2bYfDMHLjFGOOI7x98YXCGwlnKWYGSMDvpsrRpdbbftL h9wzgnNhISIWhLfsuv2DUXnr9snUJK5gdcOogvfp6joJcoFPhrCwPPAufUsjF08= =RN0r -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --HBuNA11GSI45HMptgCggGgKCDj9poGvrQ--