Re: [libvirt] Re: [PATCH 1/6] host ("node") device enumeration - public API additions
I'm not crazy about "node driver" either (it has drifted somewhat from
its original intention, as I understood that many of the "node"
operations may be hypervisor-dependent).
Ben Guthro suggested "Device Monitor" which seems just right to me. I
*think* it's clear that we're monitoring the node's devices (and not
virtual ones).
Dave
On Tue, 2008-10-28 at 14:01 +0100, Daniel Veillard wrote:
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 01:49:19PM -0400, David Lively wrote:
> This patch contains the public API additions.
>
the libvirt.h part looks just fine at this point for me.
I'm just wondering a bit about some of the naming "node driver"
are devkit and Hal really "node drivers", then sound more like
"device watcher".
Maybe the error file should state
VIR_FROM_DEVWATCH instead of VIR_FROM_NODE
then the names we pick for the internal symbols can be changed
We will need to augment the terminology section at some point
but I'm not sure what's the best way to describe those new internal
APIs, "Node driver" doesn't really fit IMHO, "Device watcher" is
a bit
better but doesn't feel great either.
Daniel