Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] storage pool discovery
On Fri, 2008-08-22 at 16:15 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 10:58:54AM -0400, David Lively wrote:
> As long as we're on the subject of naming (and before it's too late),
> it's been bothering me that we keep calling this "storage pool
> discovery". To me, "storage source discovery" seems more accurate
> (because they're not pools until we define libvirt pools based on the
> sources). So I'd prefer renaming the various *Discover[Storage]Pools*
> functions (and support structs) introduced in this patch to
> *Discover[Storage]Sources*. I was just sticking with the
> originally-proposed names to avoid confusion. What do you all think?
That sounds like a reasonable idea to me.
[Sorry to harp on the naming issue. But names are important, and we
can't change them once they're in the API ...]
After making the change I suggested above, it now feels a little strange
because "Pool" is gone from the name. I'm starting to think
"*Discover[Storage]PoolSources*" is the only good choice. It's rather
long, but makes it clear we're talking about storage pool sources (as
opposed to "storage sources", which feels a little ambiguous, or
"storage pools" which isn't accurate since they're not (yet) pools).
Sound ok?
Dave