On 18/03/2014, at 10:40 AM, Kaushal M wrote: > IMO, its best if we just remove the default action instead of changing > its meaning. It is best if force the user to provide an operation for > the remove-brick command. This way, users using scripts will know that > something has changed when the script breaks. It is a simple fix if > the users want to original behavior back, just add commit force as the > operation. > > If we change the default to start, scripts would not break and users > wouldn't be notified. They'll continue running the script believing > that the bricks have been forcefully removed, where as it wouldn't be > the case. This could lead to further problems. > > Regarding the deprecation, I suggest we add the deprecation message to > 3.5 before it ships. We will not be breaking any of the assumed > functionality for this release, and can safely do the actual change in > 3.6. > > tl;dr, Require an explicit operation for the remove-brick command and > add the deprecation message to 3.5.
+1 Sounds good to me. :) + Justin -- Open Source and Standards @ Red Hat twitter.com/realjustinclift _______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel