On 12/07/2015 05:18 PM, David Gibson wrote: > On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 11:11:31AM +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> David Gibson <da...@gibson.dropbear.id.au> writes: >>
>>>> It was {} in 2.4. Changing it to null so we can distingish "nothing"
>>>> from "empty" is an incompatible change. May make sense anyway, but I
>>>> can't judge it.
>>>
>>> Strictly speaking it's an incompatible change, yes. But I find it
>>> hard to imagine anything would be relying on the {} behaviour. This
>>> property is essentially a debugging interface to start with, and the
>>> missing / empty case is examining it in a state that's unlikely to be
>>> interesting.
>>
>> I'm not against changing it, I just want it changed intentionally rather
>> than by accidental side effect :)
>>
>> If you tell me you want null here going forward, I'll make sure it gets
>> changed to null in the next development cycle, with a nice commit
>> message.
>
> I would like it to be null (or simply missing) in future.
Okay, I'm about to post the patch for just that, for the 2.6 timeframe.
> But leaving it as is for 2.5 is fine.
Good.
--
Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
