> On Feb 10, 2015, at 4:06 AM, Igor Galić wrote:
>
>
>
> - On 6 Feb, 2015, at 05:12, James Peach jpe...@apache.org wrote:
>
>>> On Feb 5, 2015, at 5:35 PM, Yongming Zhao wrote:
>>>
>>> UI is most end user cares, I’d like we should keep the traffic_line.
>>> traffic_ctl
>>> sounds perfe
- On 6 Feb, 2015, at 05:12, James Peach jpe...@apache.org wrote:
>> On Feb 5, 2015, at 5:35 PM, Yongming Zhao wrote:
>>
>> UI is most end user cares, I’d like we should keep the traffic_line.
>> traffic_ctl
>> sounds perfect, can we have both?
>
> We can have both for a while, but I don'
yeah, the perl version is nice to be used in show:xxx, but most of the features
in config:xxx is not implemented, as most of the config commands broken and I
don’t want to bring them back, I’d like to have the following feature or
subcommands:
1, cache: enable disable and clear
2, hostdb: clear(
> On Feb 5, 2015, at 5:35 PM, Yongming Zhao wrote:
>
> UI is most end user cares, I’d like we should keep the traffic_line.
> traffic_ctl sounds perfect, can we have both?
We can have both for a while, but I don't think we should have both forever.
> and can you please think of reimplement so
> On Feb 5, 2015, at 6:35 PM, Yongming Zhao wrote:
>
> UI is most end user cares, I’d like we should keep the traffic_line.
> traffic_ctl sounds perfect, can we have both? and can you please think of
> reimplement some of the commands in the removed traffic_shell?
fwiw, most of the commands
UI is most end user cares, I’d like we should keep the traffic_line.
traffic_ctl sounds perfect, can we have both? and can you please think of
reimplement some of the commands in the removed traffic_shell?
thanks
- Yongming Zhao 赵永明
> 在 2015年2月6日，上午5:07，James Peach 写道：
>
>
>> On Feb 5, 201
> On Feb 5, 2015, at 12:16 PM, Bin Zeng wrote:
>
> It is great someone is expanding the functionality of traffic_line. *thumbs
> up*. My questions might sound naive. Why are we replacing traffic_line with
> traffic_ctl (traffic_ctl is a better name arguably)? It seems disruptive to
> retire t
It is great someone is expanding the functionality of traffic_line. *thumbs
up*. My questions might sound naive. Why are we replacing traffic_line with
traffic_ctl (traffic_ctl is a better name arguably)? It seems disruptive to
retire traffic_line because some people might depend on it. Is there
