On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 10:58:54AM -0400, David Lively wrote: > On Fri, 2008-08-22 at 09:50 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > > + const char *start_tag = "<SourceList>\n"; > > > + const char *end_tag = "</SourceList>\n"; > > > > I'd prefer that to be <sources> - we avoid capitals in the > > XML element names everywhere else, and in the few cases of > > joining words use an underscore, but I think plural form is > > OK for this. > > I prefer <sources> as well, so I'll change this. And I'll put those > defines in storage_backend.h as well. > > As long as we're on the subject of naming (and before it's too late), > it's been bothering me that we keep calling this "storage pool > discovery". To me, "storage source discovery" seems more accurate > (because they're not pools until we define libvirt pools based on the > sources). So I'd prefer renaming the various *Discover[Storage]Pools* > functions (and support structs) introduced in this patch to > *Discover[Storage]Sources*. I was just sticking with the > originally-proposed names to avoid confusion. What do you all think? That sounds like a reasonable idea to me. Daniel -- |: Red Hat, Engineering, London -o- http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org -o- http://ovirt.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :| -- Libvir-list mailing list Libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list