Quoth Liane Praza on Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 01:54:08PM -0800: > David Bustos wrote: > >Doesn't this command imply the need to tell when refresh is necessary, > >and what changes it will make? > > hmmm. Suggests it'd be nice, sure, and as I suspect you've seen I've > been updating related bugs. But, I think it's separable and valuable > even without the work of determining what's been modified in the > existing svccfg session.
Ok. Sorry for not paying closer attention, but is there a specific bug ID for this functionality? > >What stability level? I would like to replace it with transactional > >semantics (i.e., a "commit" subcommand) in the profiles project. > > Committed. And Patch binding. I suspect we'll want to backport the > offline refresh functionality, and don't suspect we'll be backporting > profiles. > > If profiles come in before Nevada ships with a better solution (or new > subcommand) for the offline repository problem, and we determine it's > better to obsolete this in favor of the new interface, that's relatively > simple. (Modulo a hypothesized but not guaranteed backport.) If we suspect this will be obsoleted, shouldn't that result in a lower stability level? Otherwise, aren't we saddling ourselves with supporting this for two releases? David
