From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LA5Tu-0001fF-Th for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2008 11:30:42 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LA5Tu-0001es-5i for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2008 11:30:42 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=40820 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LA5Tt-0001em-W0 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2008 11:30:42 -0500 Received: from yx-out-1718.google.com ([74.125.44.155]:24121) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LA5Tt-0005Pl-2v for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2008 11:30:41 -0500 Received: by yx-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 3so17283yxi.82 for ; Tue, 09 Dec 2008 08:30:40 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2008 17:30:40 +0100 From: Gildas Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] rename vlan to vnet and mark vlan as deprecated In-Reply-To: <493E9769.7030701@codemonkey.ws> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20081209153727.GT15102@redhat.com> <493E92DA.2030209@codemonkey.ws> <493E9769.7030701@codemonkey.ws> 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 >> I think that keeping backward compatibility is a good idea and I'm ok >> to remove the warning message even though I don't think it does any >> harm. I will modify the patch to document the fact that vlan= is not >> IEEE 902.1q and that vnet= is the prefered option. >> > > If we're going to switch to vnet= (and I don't think we should), then it > should be with a flag day. And all at once conversion that changes internal > and external references. I'm not sure I understand what you mean by that >> I really think that it's a change that should done, both in the code >> and usage as both will greatly benefit from a move to VNET. Just look >> at the actual naming mess in e1000.c where real 802.1q handling takes >> place as well... >> > > I think this may cause minor confusion for a very small number of people, > but for most people, who probably have no idea what 802.1q is, it never is > an issue. > > This is only the second time I've seen someone get confused by vlan= since > the syntax was introduced. It's really not a big deal AFAICT. > > Regards, > > Anthony Liguori As I see it, people who have no idea what 802.1q vlans are are not sysadmins and will probably never use the vlan= option... I'm confused about the reasons why an improvement for end users, be it minor, should be rejected. Regards. Gildas