Re: [libvirt] [libvirt-glib] Correct namespace prefix for GVirConfig symbols

On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 04:17:32PM +0100, Christophe Fergeau wrote: > On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 02:26:48AM +0200, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 1:46 AM, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) > > <zeeshanak(a)gnome.org&gt; wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 1:43 AM, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) > > > <zeeshanak(a)gnome.org&gt; wrote: > > >> From: "Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)" <zeeshanak(a)gnome.org&gt; > > >> > > >> Breaks API and ABI on the fundamental level but lets fix this now while > > >> we don't guarantee any API/ABI stability. > > > > > > Forgot to mention that this patch is on top of Christophe's ACK'ed but > > > unmerged 'Add GVirConfigDomainSound' tree. > > > >   And seems my patch went over the limit so it got chopped. You can > > find the patch here as well: > > https://gitorious.org/~zeenix/libvirt/zeenix-libvirt-glib/commit/d5e5c647... > > For what it's worth, I don't think this patch improves the situation much > if we can't express nested namespaces (ie put all the GVirConfigDomain* > objects to a GVir::Config::Domain or GVirConfig::Domain namespace). Since > it's pretty invasive, I'd lean toward not applying it, but I have no strong > opinion either way, I'm fine if it goes in too. Let's see what danpb thinks > about it :) AFAICT, at the C level this is pretty much a no-op in terms of changes, just changing naming conventions for types. What is the actual effect on non-C language bindings that makes this compelling to change ?