Luiz Capitulino <lcapitul...@redhat.com> writes: > On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 16:08:54 -0500 > Anthony Liguori <anth...@codemonkey.ws> wrote: > >> Luiz Capitulino <lcapitul...@redhat.com> writes: >> >> > On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 15:43:58 -0300 >> > Luiz Capitulino <lcapitul...@redhat.com> wrote: >> > >> >> On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 13:22:15 -0500 >> >> anth...@codemonkey.ws wrote: >> >> >> >> > >> >> > Hi, >> >> > >> >> > We had a violent^Wheated discussion on IRC about how to move forward >> >> > with Luiz's proposed error series. I think we reached consensus. This >> >> > note attempts to outline that. >> >> >> >> This looks great to me, violent^W heated discussions can be so productive >> >> :) >> >> >> >> > >> >> > Principles >> >> > ---------- >> >> > 1. Errors should be free formed strings with a class code >> >> > >> >> > 2. There should be a small number of class codes (10-15) added >> >> > strictly when there are specific users of a code. >> > >> > Btw, do we have a listing of those 10-15 errors already? >> >> See the clause: "added strictly when there are specific users". >> >> Users means consumers. So don't add an error type until someone cares >> to differientiate error reasons. > > What I meant is that, for 1.2 we want to reduce from 71 error codes to 10-15, > right? If that's right what are the 10-15 errors that won't be dropped? > > Or did I misunderstand?
I meant drop it down to 5-6. The existing errors that libvirt cares about plus an UnknownError. #define all existing error codes to UnknownError and then at our leisure, we can introduce more generic classes and refactor errors incrementally. Regards, Anthony Liguori
