Re: [RFC PATCH 00/13] migration: Unify capabilities and parameters

2025-05-15 Thread Peter Xu
On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 02:40:25PM -0300, Fabiano Rosas wrote: > > Can we make the two approaches mutually exclusive ? Taking your > > 'migrate' command example addition: > > > > { 'command': 'migrate', > > 'data': {'*uri': 'str', > > '*channels': [ 'MigrationChannel' ], > > +

Re: [RFC PATCH 00/13] migration: Unify capabilities and parameters

2025-04-24 Thread Markus Armbruster
Fabiano Rosas writes: > Markus Armbruster writes: > >> Daniel P. Berrangé writes: >> >>> On Fri, Apr 11, 2025 at 04:14:30PM -0300, Fabiano Rosas wrote: Open questions: --- - Deprecations/compat? I think we should deprecate migrate-set/query-capabiliti

Re: [RFC PATCH 00/13] migration: Unify capabilities and parameters

2025-04-16 Thread Fabiano Rosas
Markus Armbruster writes: > Daniel P. Berrangé writes: > >> On Fri, Apr 11, 2025 at 04:14:30PM -0300, Fabiano Rosas wrote: >>> Open questions: >>> --- >>> >>> - Deprecations/compat? >>> >>> I think we should deprecate migrate-set/query-capabilities and everything >>> to do >>> wit

Re: [RFC PATCH 00/13] migration: Unify capabilities and parameters

2025-04-16 Thread Markus Armbruster
Daniel P. Berrangé writes: > On Fri, Apr 11, 2025 at 04:14:30PM -0300, Fabiano Rosas wrote: >> Open questions: >> --- >> >> - Deprecations/compat? >> >> I think we should deprecate migrate-set/query-capabilities and everything to >> do >> with capabilities (specifically the validat

Re: [RFC PATCH 00/13] migration: Unify capabilities and parameters

2025-04-15 Thread Fabiano Rosas
Daniel P. Berrangé writes: > On Fri, Apr 11, 2025 at 04:14:30PM -0300, Fabiano Rosas wrote: >> Open questions: >> --- >> >> - Deprecations/compat? >> >> I think we should deprecate migrate-set/query-capabilities and everything to >> do >> with capabilities (specifically the validat

Re: [RFC PATCH 00/13] migration: Unify capabilities and parameters

2025-04-14 Thread Daniel P . Berrangé
On Fri, Apr 11, 2025 at 04:14:30PM -0300, Fabiano Rosas wrote: > Open questions: > --- > > - Deprecations/compat? > > I think we should deprecate migrate-set/query-capabilities and everything to > do > with capabilities (specifically the validation in the JSON at the end of the > str

Re: [RFC PATCH 00/13] migration: Unify capabilities and parameters

2025-04-14 Thread Daniel P . Berrangé
On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 02:40:25PM -0300, Fabiano Rosas wrote: > Daniel P. Berrangé writes: > > > On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 02:12:35PM -0300, Fabiano Rosas wrote: > >> Daniel P. Berrangé writes: > >> > >> > On Fri, Apr 11, 2025 at 04:14:30PM -0300, Fabiano Rosas wrote: > >> >> Open questions: > >

Re: [RFC PATCH 00/13] migration: Unify capabilities and parameters

2025-04-14 Thread Fabiano Rosas
Daniel P. Berrangé writes: > On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 02:12:35PM -0300, Fabiano Rosas wrote: >> Daniel P. Berrangé writes: >> >> > On Fri, Apr 11, 2025 at 04:14:30PM -0300, Fabiano Rosas wrote: >> >> Open questions: >> >> --- >> >> >> >> - Deprecations/compat? >> >> >> >> I think w

Re: [RFC PATCH 00/13] migration: Unify capabilities and parameters

2025-04-14 Thread Daniel P . Berrangé
On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 02:12:35PM -0300, Fabiano Rosas wrote: > Daniel P. Berrangé writes: > > > On Fri, Apr 11, 2025 at 04:14:30PM -0300, Fabiano Rosas wrote: > >> Open questions: > >> --- > >> > >> - Deprecations/compat? > >> > >> I think we should deprecate migrate-set/query-cap

[RFC PATCH 00/13] migration: Unify capabilities and parameters

2025-04-11 Thread Fabiano Rosas
Hi everyone, I did a cleanup (if it can be called that) of the user input validation for capabilities and parameters and turned the two concepts into a single 'options' to be stored in a MigrationConfig object. RFC mostly because this idea exposes (pre-existing) issues around how to validate capab