Re: [libvirt] "transient" vs "temporary"
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 10:59:32AM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 07:29:45PM +1100, Justin Clift wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> While writing up the descriptions for persistent vs transient
> objects (domains, virtual networks, etc), I'm personally finding
> the word "temporary" seems a better fit than "transient".
>
> Is there anything particularly wrong with using "temporary" in
> this context instead?
>
> Thinking that if "temporary" is ok, I'll do a search-n-replace,
> changing "transient" to "temporary" across docs (and any code).
>
> Bad idea?
I prefer the existing terminology of transient+persistent & don't
think changing it has any real benefit and the downside that since
you can't change all existing content/files out in the wild, we'll
get a mix of temporary vs transient forever more.
Rather than change the terminology, I think it is more helpful
to expand the glossary describing what terminology actually
means, because neither transient or temporary on their own are
sufficient to explain what's happening.
Expanding this page
http://virt-tools.org/learning/start-conventions/
And incorporating its content into all our doc book guides,
man pages and other documentation would be a good idea to
give people a common basis of understanding
Regards,
Daniel
--
|: Red Hat, Engineering, London -o- http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org -o- http://deltacloud.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :|