From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6297EC433F5 for ; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 15:00:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:43802 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mx9IH-0008Hj-EO for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 10:00:41 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:46526) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mx9E0-0000tg-Kc for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 09:56:17 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:46235) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mx9Dz-0000oA-04 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 09:56:16 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1639493774; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=/k2XXXkD9eeK8vCkxzP+pe2vcQ9yVuR+zW4tZricmEg=; b=J94QD4F+17ioNHekspUWkA0fV7p+PXESgtVcXehJ50CuSpDMp04V+ZW7xasiEUrPx7IPic eupDq+KWGSTp366EgI+CmzRQB2Hf/Pg/b0LHKa0NWMvmb4HF4QPrQL4/V3oGMtvFWcacRe +1NhS3qk2Y9ER9mSEnX0T8ioYI+H6GA= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-258-TVtk7PFJMdSLbZ1cDKmZXQ-1; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 09:56:11 -0500 X-MC-Unique: TVtk7PFJMdSLbZ1cDKmZXQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BDE4064143; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:56:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (unknown [10.39.194.122]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 150F17B6C8; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:56:07 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:56:05 +0000 From: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= To: Mark Burton Subject: Re: Redesign of QEMU startup & initial configuration Message-ID: References: <87ilvszg52.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> <9AF99888-A4BF-4459-92C1-71E5B76A2C79@greensocs.com> <4AED38B2-E2DD-46F7-93AA-622D5F6BB570@greensocs.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/2.1.3 (2021-09-10) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.16 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=berrange@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.133.124; envelope-from=berrange@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -34 X-Spam_score: -3.5 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.5 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.716, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= Cc: Damien Hedde , "Edgar E. Iglesias" , Markus Armbruster , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org Developers" , Mirela Grujic , =?utf-8?Q?Marc-Andr=C3=A9?= Lureau , Paolo Bonzini Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 03:42:52PM +0100, Mark Burton wrote: > I think we’re talking at cross purposes, and probably we agree (not sure). I’ll top quote to try and explain my point of view. > > I think there are two discussions being mixed: > 1/ A discussion about improving the CLI. (Having a new one, etc etc) > 2/ A discussion about supporting a low level, and complete, API that can be used by “management layers” (QAPI). > > I think this also gets mixed up with the discussion on migrating the CLI to use the low level API. > > I want to focus on the low level API. > > I dont see why we’re discussing a ‘high level’ thing when, for now, we have to support the CLI, and we have work to do on QAPI. We're discussing both because we're setting out what our end goal is to be, and that end goal should be expected to cover both use cases. > If somebody wants to build a new CLI, with a new ‘high level’ > interface, using QAPI - let them! This is too weak of a statement, as it implies that a replacement high level interface is optional and not important for the overall project. I don't believe that to be the case, so I'm saying that our design & impl plan has to demonstrate how we intend to cover both deliverables or use cases. We can't simply ignore the high level API saying it is someone else's problem to worry about. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|