Re: [libvirt] [libvirt-glib] Correct namespace prefix for GVirConfig symbols
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 7:55 PM, Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 07:33:22PM +0200, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)
wrote:
> The patch improves the situation as it makes the whole API very
> consistent w.r.t what exactly is the namespace here.
Imo the namespace really is GVir::Config, not a GVirConfig namespace
totally separate from the GVir namespace, so it does not make the whole API
"very consistent", it just changes things.
Even if the namespace is 'GVir::Config', my assertion that 'Config'
is part of the namespace and not just a symbol prefix is pretty much
correct so I don't understand what you are trying to discuss here.
> I also
> agree that nested namespaces will be better. If we decide/manage to go
> towards nested namespaces, this patch actually helps in that regard as
> well since existing API is not consistent/correct for that purpose
> either.
It helps *but breaks every library user*.
Which user? Currently the API is hardly used by 2 apps. Keeping in
mind that library is still at its infancy and missing a lot of
essential API, this shouldn't be a concern at all since breaking
things now is preferable to breaking it later when apps really depend
on it and we promise some stability.
Which is why you have to
carefully weight the pros and cons. It makes things slightly nicer,
slightly more consistent but *it breaks every user*. This is what makes it
special and worth more considerations than a quick ack while everyone is on
holidays.
I disagree and think you sometimes worry way too much. :)
Really, let's just wait until the holidays are over, as far as
I'm
concerned I wouldn't like having such a patch go in before I get a chance
to see it even if I agree with it.
Thats what I am going to do if there is no ACK for it anyway.
--
Regards,
Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)
FSF member#5124