On 05/02/2013 07:56 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 05/02/2013 07:09 AM, Matthias Bolte wrote:
>> 2013/5/2 Eric Blake <eblake(a)redhat.com>:
>>> On 05/01/2013 12:44 PM, Matthias Bolte wrote:
>>>> ---
>>>> src/esx/esx_vi_generator.py | 430
++++++++++++-------------------------------
>>>> 1 file changed, 118 insertions(+), 312 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> My python is weak, so I reviewed this by comparing the generated files
>>> before and after this patch; added comments in the generated code are
>>> nice, but there are also some added frees. Are these additions
>>> intentional to fix a leak, or are they representing a bug in your patch?
>>> If intentional, then this is 1.0.5 material if you improve the commit
>>> message and push in time; if accidental and no real bug is being fixed,
>>> then a v2 should wait until after the release.
>>
>> The changes in the generated files you're seeing here are intended,
>> but they are coming from another patch that I pushed yesterday:
>>
>>
http://libvirt.org/git/?p=libvirt.git;a=commit;h=4e650435edeb2870c907721e...
>>
>> This refactoring patch should not change the output at all. And it
>> didn't in my test.
>
> Then that must be an effect of me grabbing my snapshot at the wrong
> point when swapping between incremental builds. I'll try again, and
> sorry for the hassle that my confusion caused...
Indeed; once I grabbed the correct diff, I see no change in the output
files. And now that the release is out, it's no longer a risk of
violating freeze.
ACK.