CLOUDSTACK-3818 is resolved now based on our consensus.
Thanks -min On 7/26/13 11:33 AM, "John Burwell" <jburw...@basho.com> wrote: >Works for me -- +1. >On Jul 26, 2013, at 2:23 PM, Min Chen <min.c...@citrix.com> wrote: > >> I like this better, they will be replaced as below if there is no >> objection. >> >> createSecondaryStagingStore >> listSecondaryStagingStores >> deleteSecondaryStagingStore >> >> Jessica, please fix the UI invocation with these new api names. API >> parameters are not changed, just name is changed. >> >> Thanks >> -min >> >> On 7/26/13 11:19 AM, "Chip Childers" <chip.child...@sungard.com> wrote: >> >>> Daan answered that below with "NFS Staging", so refining that a bit, >>> here's my proposal: >>> >>> fooSecondaryStagingStore >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 06:15:04PM +0000, Min Chen wrote: >>>> John, >>>> >>>> Currently we have 3 APIs for previous cache store, they are named as: >>>> createCacheStore >>>> listCacheStores >>>> deleteCacheStore >>>> >>>> What are your preferred names for these 3 APIs? Let's get a consensus >>>> before I change it to be more effective. >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> -min >>>> >>>> From: John Burwell <jburw...@basho.com<mailto:jburw...@basho.com>> >>>> Date: Friday, July 26, 2013 9:43 AM >>>> To: Min Chen <min.c...@citrix.com<mailto:min.c...@citrix.com>> >>>> Cc: Daan Hoogland >>>> <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com<mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com>>, dev >>>> <dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org>>, Edison >>>>Su >>>> <edison...@citrix.com<mailto:edison...@citrix.com>> >>>> Subject: Re: [ACS42] NFS Cache Naming >>>> >>>> Min, >>>> >>>> That is my recommendation with a task ticket to make the consistent >>>> post 4.2.0. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> -John >>>> >>>> On Jul 26, 2013, at 12:42 PM, Min Chen >>>> <min.c...@citrix.com<mailto:min.c...@citrix.com>> wrote: >>>> >>>> So from your email below, the consensus is to fix user visible >>>>elements >>>> (UI, API, Configuration, Documentation) in 4.2, I will address that >>>>bug >>>> based on this understanding. >>>> >>>> Thanks for your clarification. >>>> -min >>>> >>>> From: John Burwell <jburw...@basho.com<mailto:jburw...@basho.com>> >>>> Date: Friday, July 26, 2013 9:38 AM >>>> To: Min Chen <min.c...@citrix.com<mailto:min.c...@citrix.com>> >>>> Cc: Daan Hoogland >>>> <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com<mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com>>, dev >>>> <dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org>>, Edison >>>>Su >>>> <edison...@citrix.com<mailto:edison...@citrix.com>> >>>> Subject: Re: [ACS42] NFS Cache Naming >>>> >>>> Min, >>>> >>>> In my opinion, it is a blocker because it is very misleading to >>>> operations, and once the name ships in documentation/UI/APIs it will >>>> essentially irreversible. Furthermore, as a community, we agreed to >>>> make this change in late May/early June. In view, community decisions >>>> for a release that are not carried in a release should become a >>>>blocker. >>>> >>>> I added a comment the following comment to the ticket which, I hope, >>>> will answer your question: >>>> >>>> Min, >>>> >>>> Ideally, both. However, given the short window, the priority is for >>>>all >>>> user visible elements (e.g. API, UI, configuration files, >>>>documentation, >>>> etc). >>>> >>>> If we do not have time address code, please open a task ticket to >>>> refactor the naming internally for post-4.2.0 work. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> -John >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> -John >>>> >>>> On Jul 26, 2013, at 12:31 PM, Min Chen >>>> <min.c...@citrix.com<mailto:min.c...@citrix.com>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi John, >>>> >>>> I saw the blocker defect filed by you regarding this Nomenclature >>>> issue(https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-3818). Honestly >>>> speaking, this does not qualify as a BLOCKER since it is not blocking >>>> any functionality. One question I commented on the bug is: do you want >>>> to change our UI to call out as "Staging Storage" wherever we have >>>>Cache >>>> Storage showing up? Or you want us to change all our internal code >>>>class >>>> and method name (like needCacheStorage, etc) to use a different >>>> class/method name? We can do former quite easily, for latter, I don't >>>> think that it is that urgent compared to fixing other real functional >>>> blockers and criticals for 4.2 release, since that is internal >>>> implementation which will be totally shielded from CloudStack user. >>>> Please share your thoughts on this. >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> -min >>>> >>>> From: Daan Hoogland >>>> <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com<mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com>> >>>> Date: Saturday, July 20, 2013 3:18 AM >>>> To: dev <dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org>> >>>> Cc: Edison Su <edison...@citrix.com<mailto:edison...@citrix.com>>, Min >>>> Chen <min.c...@citrix.com<mailto:min.c...@citrix.com>> >>>> Subject: Re: [ACS42] NFS Cache Naming >>>> >>>> NFS Staging it was in my recollection. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 10:30 PM, John Burwell >>>> <jburw...@basho.com<mailto:jburw...@basho.com>> wrote: >>>> All, >>>> >>>> It was my understanding that we had agreed to rename the "NFS Cache" >>>> mechanism to reflect that it is not a cache and remove the assumption >>>> that it will always be backed by NFS. Is my understanding correct? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> -John >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >
