On Wed, 2017-11-22 at 14:34 -0600, Chris Feist wrote: > Everyone, > > I've talked with Oyvind and Dave about the potential for changing the > new lvm resource agent's name to something that might be a little > more user friendly before we release it upstream. > > Currently the name is lvm-activate, which while descriptive, may not > be obvious to an end user how it is different/better than the current > lvm agent.
How IS it different/better? > > We've come up with a few ideas although none of them are perfect. > Here's some of the options that I've heard: > > lvm2: > Good - It's obvious it's a newer/better version of the lvm agent. > Bad - It may be associated with the lvm2 commands which we are > working on phasing out. I agree with David that lvm2 has existing connotations that would add to the confusion. > > lvmvg or lvmlv or lvm_vg/lvm_lv > Good - The agent actually manages vgs/lvs so lvmlv/lvmvg/etc. may be > more descriptive > Bad - This still may be confusing to users as to why they would use > that instead of the normal lvm agent > > Does anyone else have any other ideas for names or preferences? (Or > reasons to keep the current LVM-activate name?). > > Thanks, > Chris -- Ken Gaillot <kgail...@redhat.com> _______________________________________________ Developers mailing list Developers@clusterlabs.org http://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/developers
