17.06.2019 19:03, Kevin Wolf wrote: > Am 17.06.2019 um 13:37 hat Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy geschrieben: >> 08.06.2019 1:26, John Snow wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 6/3/19 8:00 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote: >>>> Hi all! >>>> >>>> Here is block-dirty-bitmap-remove transaction action. >>>> >>>> It is used to do transactional movement of the bitmap (which is >>>> possible in conjunction with merge command). Transactional bitmap >>>> movement is needed in scenarios with external snapshot, when we don't >>>> want to leave copy of the bitmap in the base image. >>>> >>> >>> Oh, interesting. I see why you want this now. OK, let's do it. >>> >> >> >> Hi John! >> >> Hmm, could you stage it, or should I fix something? Seems I've answered all >> questions. >> We need this for our nearest release and wanting to avoid x-vz- prefixes in >> the API, >> I'd be very grateful if we merge it soon. > > I hope you won't have to do this, but in any case x-vz- isn't the right > prefix. Please read section '6. Downstream extension of QMP' in > docs/interop/qmp-spec.txt before adding your own extensions. > > According to the spec, your prefix would be something like > __com.virtuozzo-... >
Thanks for pointing to that, I thought about this some time ago when saw Red Hat prefixes.. Still x-vz- is a lot better than nothing and most probably will not intersect with future things. However, we'll move to correct prefixes of course. -- Best regards, Vladimir
