Re: [libvirt] Should we switch to a different JSON library?

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 02:38:02PM +0100, Pino Toscano wrote: >On Tuesday, 7 November 2017 14:05:25 CET Martin Kletzander wrote: >> - Jansson [3] - I really like this one. The API seems very intuitive, >> it has nice documentation [4] in readthedocs (and I'm >> not talking about the visual style, but how easy is to >> find information), it can be used for formatting JSON >> in a similar way we are doing it. It has json_auto_t >> (optional) type that uses the attribute cleanup for >> automatic scope dereference (just in case we want to >> use it), it has iterators... did I tell you I like this >> one a lot? >> >> What do you (others) think of switching the JSON library? Do you know >> about any other projects that could be used considering license, >> platform support, etc.? Also feel free to fix any mistakes I might have >> posted. I double-checked it, but you know, "trust, but verify". > >FYI: libguestfs just switched to Jansson [1], so any version starting >from 1.39.1 will use it instead of Yajl. In case of libguestfs, yajl >was used directly, without wrappers of any sort, and the switch was >straightforward. > >[1] https://github.com/libguestfs/libguestfs/commit/bd1c5c9f4dcf38458099db8a0... > I do have a working virjson.c implementation in my local git waiting to be polished and sent. The issues with libvirt were: * virjson.c storing numbers as a string * backwards compatibility (AFAIK we want to support building on RHEL/CentOS 6, which did not have recent enough jansson - for the _foreach macros, at least 2.5 is needed) If we really need to maintain two implementations side-by-side, one of them should have an expiration date.

I don't see any version check in that libguestfs commit, what are the compatibility requirements there?