[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [libvirt] Request to rename 'destroy' to something milder.



On 06/14/2011 07:53 PM, Michal Novotny wrote:
On 06/14/2011 04:15 PM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
On 14.06.2011 12:31, Kashyap Chamarthy wrote:
(please cc me in response as I have not subscribed to this list)

Hi all,

A minor nitpick:

Every-time I suggest someone to do a force shut-down a guest using
'virsh destroy foo' , the very first question I get is -- does it
_destroy_ my data?

This causes confusion to the inexperienced user and makes him/her
suspect that the data/disk could be destroyed while running 'virsh
destroy foo'

Maybe replacing it to a milder name like 'poweroff' or something might
help?
Libvirt has this philosophy to be backward compatible and therefore not
to change old API including virsh commands. But as time flies, some APIs
are consumed by new ones (virDomainCreateLinux is now just alias for
virDomainCreateXML). So changing this is not feasible way. What might
be, is to create less invasive aliases. But we can't make 'destroy'
command to go away.

Hi Michal,
that's right and that's right I've recommended adding the new command
'poweroff' to be an alias for the 'destroy'. We can do rename right now
but we can mark 'destroy' as obsoleted with backwards compatibility and
issue the 'poweroff' command instead. If the 'destroy' command is marked
as obsoleted at least in the virsh case we can remove the 'destroy'
command one day theoretically since it will be no longer supported way
to poweroff the guest. And by 'one day' I mean in several minor (or even
major) of libvirt.

Michal, yep, this sounds perfectly reasonable. And doesn't break any backward compatibility..

Thanks,
Michal



--
/kashyap


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]