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.)