On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 01:10:40PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 22 April 2016 at 12:55, Daniel P. Berrange <berra...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 01:53:47PM +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote: > >> -iscsi is a weird thing anyway. We should do things the usual way, with > >> a proper BlockdevOptionsIscsi QAPI structure. Introducing a new API in > >> 2.6 when we know we'll deprecate it again in 2.7 doesn't seem to make > >> that much sense. > >> > >> Plus, it's -rc4 now. The problem isn't a crash or a regression. It > >> merely means that you might need to wait for another release before you > >> can use iscsi. Pretty much the definition of a new feature. > > > > Ok, i thought that would probably be the response, but I wanted to be able > > to say I tried anyway, given it was for a libvirt security bug. We'll just > > have to a wait a bit longer to fix it for iscsi. > > OK, I have moved that item to "Not planned to be fixed for 2.6" in > the Planning page. Could you write a suitable note in the ChangeLog > page if you think it makes sense to do so, please?
Yep, will do. Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|
