From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LA6Ab-0002Gj-JE for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2008 12:14:49 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LA6Aa-0002Dw-87 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2008 12:14:49 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=50565 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LA6AZ-0002Dp-PV for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2008 12:14:47 -0500 Received: from mx20.gnu.org ([199.232.41.8]:55267) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LA6AZ-0002bs-Fx for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2008 12:14:47 -0500 Received: from mail.codesourcery.com ([65.74.133.4]) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LA6AY-0006J6-4X for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2008 12:14:46 -0500 From: Paul Brook Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] rename vlan to vnet and mark vlan as deprecated Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2008 17:14:41 +0000 References: <493E8EED.6050308@codemonkey.ws> <20081209182027.37515e6e.kristoffer.ericson@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20081209182027.37515e6e.kristoffer.ericson@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200812091714.41583.paul@codesourcery.com> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: Kristoffer Ericson > > Documentation improvement is always welcome though. If you think the > > default help output or man pages can be clarified to make this more > > clear, that's certainly a reasonable thing to do. > > Or atleast accept vnet as an argument to make the transition > somewhere in the future. When exactly? IMHO we should either rename the option, support both names indefinitely, or we leave things as they are. Spewing warnings to stderr seems like the worst of both worlds. In practice it's likely to just cause annoyance and be ignored until the option actually goes away. Paul