I applied this patch and all the previous ones to master, with that
naming change.
On Sun, Aug 02, 2015 at 12:12:48PM -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> OK, I'll change this to use Logical_Flow for the name of the table.
>
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 03:40:19PM -0700, Alex Wang wrote:
> > Just to mention th
OK, I'll change this to use Logical_Flow for the name of the table.
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 03:40:19PM -0700, Alex Wang wrote:
> Just to mention that I also think Flow is a better name for this table.
>
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>
> > I have a lot of misgivings about
Just to mention that I also think Flow is a better name for this table.
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> I have a lot of misgivings about all of the possible names.
>
> Thanks.
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 04:33:23PM -0700, Justin Pettit wrote:
> > I think Pipeline is more des
I have a lot of misgivings about all of the possible names.
Thanks.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 04:33:23PM -0700, Justin Pettit wrote:
> I think Pipeline is more descriptive about what it actually is. I also find
> it confusing since we use the term "rule" in the classifier. I think Flow
> (or Lo
I think Pipeline is more descriptive about what it actually is. I also find it
confusing since we use the term "rule" in the classifier. I think Flow (or
Logical_Flow) would be clearer than Rule, since we really are talking about
flows, and people may look for a distinction that isn't there.
The OVN pipeline is being split into two phases, which are most naturally
called "pipelines". I kept getting very confused trying to call them
anything else, and in the end it seems to make more sense to just rename
the Pipeline table.
It would be even better to call this table Flow or Logical_Fl
