Re: [libvirt] [RFC] making (newly public) EventImpl interface moreconsistent
On Fri, 2008-11-14 at 14:11 +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 07:36:27AM -0500, Ben Guthro wrote:
> I'll answer for Dave, while I'm looking at this.
>
> As far as I know, Dave is of the opinion that we are just "getting lucky"
> using the APIs as we are, and remains convinced that his suggested change
> is necessary here.
>
> He (and I) remain worried that release of the EventImpl API without this
> API change could get us into trouble in the future, as we would have to
> support the released API that has different semantics than DBus, which
> we were supposed to be modeled closely to.
Yep.
Basically, there is no downside to implementing your suggestion of
allowing
the same FD to be registered, and a clear potential downside to our current
impl. So I'll re-write the Add/RemoveHandle API as you suggested to eliminate
the risk
Thank you! If you'd rather, I'd be happy to make those changes (today)
and submit a patch. (But I haven't implemented them yet, other than
changing the decls and documentation.)
Dave