On 30/07/2014 08:02, Jan Kiszka wrote: > Yet identical to 2.1. If it's *really* identical to 2.1, are we going to add the 2.2 machine type to 2.1 as well, so that things that have difficulty using different source and destination machine types can migrate from 2.2 to 2.1?
Or am I missing the point and is the issue that 2.2 is actually different to 2.1, not in the machine type definition, but in what is sent within the migrated data? If so, a commit message to this effect might be helpful. -- Alex Bligh
