Re: [PULL 0/5] Python patches

[John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5191 bytes --]

On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 1:20 PM Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <
vsementsov@virtuozzo.com> wrote:

> 17.11.2021 20:56, John Snow wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 4:42 AM Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com
> <mailto:kraxel@redhat.com>> wrote:
> >
> >        Hi,
> >
> >      > https://gitlab.com/jsnow/qemu.git <
> https://gitlab.com/jsnow/qemu.git> tags/python-pull-request
> >
> >     What is the status of the plan to upload this to pypi eventually?
> >
> >
> > Thanks for asking!
> >
> > The honest answer is "I'm not exactly sure", but there are a few things
> to work out still. Let me use this as an opportunity to try and give you an
> honest answer.
> > We've got four packages right now: qmp, aqmp, machine and utils.
> >
> > - I don't intend to *ever* upload utils, I created that one specifically
> as an in-tree package for "low quality" code that we just need as glue.
> > - aqmp is brand new. It was moved as the default provider for the QMP
> protocol in the tree (being used by machine.py) only two weeks ago. I am
> using this current RC testing phase to find any problems with it.
> > - qmp is something I want to deprecate, I don't intend to upload it to
> PyPI. I intend to rename aqmp -> qmp and have just the one qmp package. I
> can't do this until next release, and only after we are confident and happy
> that aqmp is stable enough.
> > - machine has a few problems with it. I am reluctant to upload it in its
> current form. I am actively developing a new version of it that uses the
> new Async QMP module. However, this might take a bit of time, I fear.
> >
> > So, I think I have this timeline for myself:
> >
> > - Fix bugs in AQMP package revealed during RC testing
> > - Introduce sync wrapper for AQMP that resembles the native AQMP
> interface more than it resembles the "legacy QMP" interface.
> > - Remove all QEMU source tree uses of qemu.qmp and qemu.aqmp.legacy.
> > - Delete qemu.qmp and rename qemu.aqmp to qemu.qmp.
> > - Split python/qemu/qmp out into its own repository and begin uploading
> it to PyPI, as a test. (Do not delete python/qemu/qmp yet at this phase.)
> > - Transition any users of the Python packages in the QEMU source tree to
> installing the QMP dependency from PyPI instead of grabbing it from the
> tree.
> > - Delete python/qemu/qmp from the QEMU source tree at this moment;
> "re-fork" the package if necessary to collect any commits since the "test
> split" procedure.
> >
>
> That all sounds great!
>
> >
> > Some questions to work out:
> > - What tools should be uploaded with qemu.qmp? a version of qmp-shell is
> high on the list for me. qom, qom-set, qom-get, qom-list, qom-tree,
> qom-fuse etc I am suspecting might be better left behind in qemu.utils
> instead, though. I am not sure I want to support those more broadly. They
> weren't designed for "external consumption".
> > - qemu-ga-client should be moved over into utils, or possibly even
> deleted -- it hasn't seen a lot of love and I doubt there are any users. I
> don't have the bandwidth to refurbish it for no users. Maybe if there's a
> demand in the future ...
> >
> >
> > ... This might be being overcautious, though. Perhaps I can upload a
> version of "qemu.aqmp" even this week just as a demonstration of how it
> would work.
> >
>
> Why do we need wait for next release for renaming aqmp -> qmp? Or what
> next release do you mean? I think you can rename it as soon as 6.3
> development phase is open.
>
>
I might be confused in my thinking because there's a ton of little tasks to
do, and I won't pretend I have thought extremely carefully about the
precise order in which they *have* to be done, only the order in which that
it occurs to me to do them. :)

I suppose I could do something like rename "qmp" to "legacy_qmp" in the
tree as an intermediate step and accomplish the "aqmp -> qmp" rename
sooner, but there's a lot of churn inherent to that. Since there's a lot of
churn inherent to moving users off of the old interface anyway, I figured
I'd just tackle it all at once... which I can't do until the tree re-opens
again.

I can certainly work on it in the meantime, though.

I'm not sure that's a good idea to upload qemu.aqmp to public and than
> rename it to qemu.qmp.. Maybe, you can upload it now as qemu.qmp? So,
> first, create a separate repo with aqmp (already renamed to qmp), upload it
> to PyPI (as qmp) - this all as a first step. And then gradually move Qemu
> to use this new repo instead its own qmp/aqmp.
>

I'm afraid of doing this because I don't want to pollute the 'qemu.qmp'
space with two packages that contain radically different things in it. It
feels safer to fully switch over the QEMU source tree first, and THEN
upload to PyPI. If I go out of order there, I worry that we will run into
circumstances where various scripts/tools will use "the wrong qemu.qmp",
and it will be frustrating for people without a lot of Python packaging
experience to diagnose on their own.

The safest thing is just to wait for me to do all the cleanup churn I laid
out above, but if I were to demo a "preview", doing it under the
'qemu.aqmp' name seems like the safest bet because I don't plan to use that
name long-term.

--js

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 6516 bytes --]