[libvirt PATCH v2] manpages/virsh: A couple of small clarifications
Kashyap Chamarthy
kchamart at redhat.com
Tue Aug 25 09:15:36 UTC 2020
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:
[...]
> > > -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".
Oops, was sloppy.
Given Peter's comment below, I'm not sure if I should go with "domains"
or "guests" here :)
> > 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.
Yeah, I understand.
> > > 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/?
Yes. (I think it's a reasonable assumption that most people can guess
what a "cold start" is.)
> > 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.
Yeah, I'm trying to (consistently) use "guest" wherever it makes sense.
While knowing that the word "domain" is pretty deeply embedded in API
names, etc.
--
/kashyap
More information about the libvir-list
mailing list