Ooh, a proper bikeshed!
If this command is still doing the same thing it was when
I first wrote the original hack version, then it's more like
restore-state-servers-and-hope-that-nothing-much-changed-since-we-dumped.
I'm guessing that Eric's issue with "restore" is that the word implies that
it restores the entire environment, which it does not. But "recover"
has a similar issue.
Perhaps "dump-state" and "restore-state" might convey more
accurately what's being done here?
cheers,
rog.
On 25 March 2015 at 03:25, Tim Penhey <tim.pen...@canonical.com> wrote:
> I'm seriously not in favour of calling it "recover", and not just
> because it has a particular meaning in Go.
>
> Perhaps "rebuild" or "recreate", but "recover" feels wrong.
>
> Tim
>
> On 24/03/15 05:27, Eric Snow wrote:
>> I've opened https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1435413 for
>> renaming "restore" to "recover".
>>
>> -eric
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 10:00 AM, Horacio Duran
>> <horacio.du...@canonical.com> wrote:
>>> Nope this is not very accurate I believe that you got some parts wrong out
>>> of our conversation. I am currently on vacation but upon return I'll submit
>>> a writeup with some graphic flows explaining how this all works (the recover
>>> part I agree with, in any case what is being recovered/restored is the state
>>> server so that is what we should be trying to convey with the name)
>>
>
>
> --
> Juju-dev mailing list
> Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
--
Juju-dev mailing list
Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
