>----- Original Message ----- >From: "avi tal" <[email protected]> >To: "Ori Liel" <[email protected]> >Cc: "michael pasternak" <[email protected]>, [email protected] >Sent: Tuesday, May 1, 2012 3:58:35 PM >Subject: Logical network Usages collection problematic approach > >Hi, >The new design of logical network 'usages' collection came out a bit >problematic or shall i say annoying. >The idea is to send the entire collection elements every time a user >wants to update a single usage otherwise the missing elements will be >automatically removed from the collection. > >Example: >having <usages><usage>VM</usage><usages> >1. in order to add 'display' usage to the collection i must send 'vm' as >well. >2. to remove an element from the collection, i must send the entire >collection without the desired element >(note: in this case it is only one extra element for every update but in >other cases it could be much more) > > >The solution should be: ><usages><vm>true</vm><display>false</display></usages> >That way we can send a single usage having different boolean text >without including the entire collection elements.
The question is, how flexible should usages be. If we don't expect more usages to be added in the future, then the hard-coded modelling that you suggest is ok, and I have no problem with it. If more usages are expected to be added, then there's added value to keeping it generic. Ori _______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
