So from your email below, the consensus is to fix user visible elements (UI, API, Configuration, Documentation) in 4.2, I will address that bug based on this understanding.
Thanks for your clarification. -min From: John Burwell <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Friday, July 26, 2013 9:38 AM To: Min Chen <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: Daan Hoogland <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, dev <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, Edison Su <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [ACS42] NFS Cache Naming Min, In my opinion, it is a blocker because it is very misleading to operations, and once the name ships in documentation/UI/APIs it will essentially irreversible. Furthermore, as a community, we agreed to make this change in late May/early June. In view, community decisions for a release that are not carried in a release should become a blocker. I added a comment the following comment to the ticket which, I hope, will answer your question: Min, Ideally, both. However, given the short window, the priority is for all user visible elements (e.g. API, UI, configuration files, documentation, etc). If we do not have time address code, please open a task ticket to refactor the naming internally for post-4.2.0 work. Thanks, -John Thanks, -John On Jul 26, 2013, at 12:31 PM, Min Chen <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi John, I saw the blocker defect filed by you regarding this Nomenclature issue(https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-3818). Honestly speaking, this does not qualify as a BLOCKER since it is not blocking any functionality. One question I commented on the bug is: do you want to change our UI to call out as "Staging Storage" wherever we have Cache Storage showing up? Or you want us to change all our internal code class and method name (like needCacheStorage, etc) to use a different class/method name? We can do former quite easily, for latter, I don't think that it is that urgent compared to fixing other real functional blockers and criticals for 4.2 release, since that is internal implementation which will be totally shielded from CloudStack user. Please share your thoughts on this. Thanks -min From: Daan Hoogland <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Saturday, July 20, 2013 3:18 AM To: dev <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: Edison Su <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, Min Chen <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [ACS42] NFS Cache Naming NFS Staging it was in my recollection. On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 10:30 PM, John Burwell <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: All, It was my understanding that we had agreed to rename the "NFS Cache" mechanism to reflect that it is not a cache and remove the assumption that it will always be backed by NFS. Is my understanding correct? Thanks, -John
