On Sun, Nov 18, 2007 at 11:12:45PM -0700, Rainer Heilke wrote: > Nicolas Williams wrote: > >No, I think *nothing* should do a clear operation other than clear > >itself. The consensus on this, ISTM, is strong. > > In which case, as I've said, I don't see the point of having "start" at > all (it's just an alias to "enable -some switches"). It buys us nothing.
That's what the start proposal has always been: an alias. Or at least that's what Darren's original suggestion was, and it's what I support. A "revive" command could be more heroic because it the word implies that, but as long as we don't have a way to automate the process of restoring a service in maintenance mode to health, I don't see how such a command could be safe. Not to belabor the point, but, I agree, an alias buys us nothing much. I've already explained what feature I think we need (not "start").
