[libvirt PATCH v2] manpages/virsh: A couple of small clarifications

[Pavel Hrdina]

On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 05:33:21PM +0200, Peter Krempa wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 17:01:50 +0200, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> > On 8/4/20 4:04 PM, Kashyap Chamarthy wrote:
> > > Changes:
> > > 
> > >    - Update the descriptions of --current & --config flags.
> > > 
> > >      For --config, the reason to rephrase "next boot" to "next start"
> > >      is: "Next boot may still imply somebody selecting "reboot" in the
> > >      guest OS and fully expecting the changes to be applied."  (per Peter
> > >      Krempa)
> > > 
> > >      For --current, existing documentation says:
> > > 
> > >        "If *--current* is specified, affect the current guest state."
> > > 
> > >      It's not entirely clear what states can "current" mean or imply.  So
> > >      rephrase it in context of the other two related flags --live and
> > >      --config.
> > > 
> > >    - While at it, I also took the liberty to replace the few occurrences
> > >      of "peristent domain[s]" with "persistent guest[s]"
> > > 
> > > Fix all occurrences (i.e. as many as I could spot) of this.
> > > 
> > > (Thanks: Dan Berrangé on IRC.)
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Kashyap Chamarthy <kchamart at redhat.com>
> > > ---
> > > - v2: Address Peter Krempa's feedback
> > >    (https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2020-July/msg01274.html)
> > > ---
> > >   docs/manpages/virsh.rst | 163 +++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
> > >   1 file changed, 95 insertions(+), 68 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/docs/manpages/virsh.rst b/docs/manpages/virsh.rst
> > > index 1a2cf09fb7..561b1f038e 100644
> > > --- a/docs/manpages/virsh.rst
> > > +++ b/docs/manpages/virsh.rst
> > > @@ -710,7 +710,7 @@ groups:
> > >   Persistence
> > >   ...........
> > > -Flag *--persistent* is used to include persistent domains in the returned
> > > +Flag *--persistent* is used to include persistent guests in the returned
> > >   list. To include transient domains specify *--transient*.
> > 
> > So this changes "domains" to "guests", but only for the first sentence. The
> > second one still refers to "domains". IMO this is not desirable change
> > because it's not aligned with our terminology. We call them "domains" (I
> > wish we would call them guests too, but too late for that). And we are not
> > consistent, I know.
> > 
> > >   Existence of managed save image
> > > @@ -1089,8 +1089,9 @@ then the default value of 1 second will be displayed. Supplying a 0 will
> > >   reset the value back to the default.
> > >   If *--live* is specified, affect a running guest.
> > > -If *--config* is specified, affect the next boot of a persistent guest.
> > > -If *--current* is specified, affect the current guest state.
> > > +If *--config* is specified, affect the next start of a persistent guest.
> > 
> > s/next start/next cold start/?
> > s/guest/domain/ (here and for the rest of the lines you're changing)
> 
> To be fair, I'm not very fond of sticking too much to the XEN
> terminology, especially since most of the virtualization world uses
> 'guest' to refer to it.

+1 or VM (virtual machine) which is commonly used as well.

Our API obviously have to stick with `domain` but everywhere else I
would prefer using guest/VM.

Pavel
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/attachments/20200824/8278e99d/attachment-0001.sig>