[libvirt] C# bindings (Was: First patch)

[arnaud.champion at devatom.fr]

The idea was to stick to libvirt API documentation which contain a libvirt 
part and a virError part. Types are used everywhere that's why they are at a 
upper level (LibvirtBindings). In fact, libVirt and libvirtError are in the 
LibvirtBindings, as they are classes. This is useful to clean the code and 
not have all the code in one class... But I don't know what is better, 
usually, in this kind of project, I'm used to separate things.

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Matthias Bolte" <matthias.bolte at googlemail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 5:43 PM
To: <arnaud.champion at devatom.fr>
Cc: "Justin Clift" <jclift at redhat.com>; <libvir-list at redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [libvirt] C# bindings (Was: First patch)

> 2010/10/18  <arnaud.champion at devatom.fr>:
>> The class library expose the "LibvirtBindings" namespace. This namespace
>> expose all needed types (enum, struct). It also expose 2 main classes :
>> "libVirt" and "libvirtError". The "libVirt" class expose all  interfaces 
>> of
>> the libvirt library to handle virtualized domains and "libvirtError" 
>> class
>> expose all interfaces of the libvirt library to handle errors raised 
>> while
>> using the library.
>
> Is there a specific reason to use three different ways to capitalize
> libvirt in the C# code?
>
> LibvirtBindings
> libVirt
> libvirtError
>
> I suggest you choose one form and stick with it, for example
>
> LibvirtBindings
> Libvirt
> LibvirtError
>
> Matthias
>