On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 06:42:10PM +0900, Masayuki Sunou wrote: > Hi > > I understood as follows. > > * There is no problem in a proposal 1 and a proposal 2 > * It is better that the user can choose use of XML and use of command-option > by the situation > > Therefore, I want to add both proposal 1 and proposal 2 to virsh. > There is no problem in this opinion? > > And, I am going to correct about naming. > vif --> interface > vbd --> disk That would be excellent ! Jet-lag and lack of sleep made me confuse the vif and vbd in the name with actual arguments. Changing the names is fine, maybe we can get better words: maybe add-netif/remove-netif instead of just using 'interface' which is very generic, and maybe using add-block/remove-block instead of disk, some devices may actually not be disk (e.g. tape drive), but it's just a minor suggestion. thanks a lot ! Daniel -- Red Hat Virtualization group http://redhat.com/virtualization/ Daniel Veillard | virtualization library http://libvirt.org/ veillard@xxxxxxxxxx | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/