On Sat, Jul 2, 2016 at 1:26 AM, Ken Gaillot wrote:
> On 07/01/2016 04:48 AM, Jan Pokorný wrote:
>> On 01/07/16 09:23 +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote:
>> Ken Gaillot schrieb am 30.06.2016 um 18:58 in
>> Nachricht
>>> <57754f9f.8070...@redhat.com>:
On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 7:48 PM, Jan Pokorný wrote:
> On 01/07/16 09:23 +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote:
> Ken Gaillot schrieb am 30.06.2016 um 18:58 in
> Nachricht
>> <57754f9f.8070...@redhat.com>:
>>> I've been meaning to address the implementation
On 07/04/2016 03:52 AM, Vladislav Bogdanov wrote:
> 01.07.2016 18:26, Ken Gaillot wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> You're right, "parameters" or "params" would be more consistent with
>> existing usage. "Instance attributes" is probably the most technically
>> correct term. I'll vote for "reload-params"
>
01.07.2016 18:26, Ken Gaillot wrote:
[...]
You're right, "parameters" or "params" would be more consistent with
existing usage. "Instance attributes" is probably the most technically
correct term. I'll vote for "reload-params"
May be "reconfigure" fits better? This would at least introduce
On 07/01/2016 04:48 AM, Jan Pokorný wrote:
> On 01/07/16 09:23 +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote:
> Ken Gaillot schrieb am 30.06.2016 um 18:58 in
> Nachricht
>> <57754f9f.8070...@redhat.com>:
>>> I've been meaning to address the implementation of "reload" in Pacemaker
>>>
On 01/07/16 09:23 +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote:
Ken Gaillot schrieb am 30.06.2016 um 18:58 in
Nachricht
> <57754f9f.8070...@redhat.com>:
>> I've been meaning to address the implementation of "reload" in Pacemaker
>> for a while now, and I think the next release will