On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 17:47:25 -0500 Anthony Liguori <anth...@codemonkey.ws> wrote:
> 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. That's great, I've already started working on this and should post the series soon.