I'm not crazy about "node driver" either (it has drifted somewhat from its original intention, as I understood that many of the "node" operations may be hypervisor-dependent). Ben Guthro suggested "Device Monitor" which seems just right to me. I *think* it's clear that we're monitoring the node's devices (and not virtual ones). Dave On Tue, 2008-10-28 at 14:01 +0100, Daniel Veillard wrote: > On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 01:49:19PM -0400, David Lively wrote: > > This patch contains the public API additions. > > > > the libvirt.h part looks just fine at this point for me. > I'm just wondering a bit about some of the naming "node driver" > are devkit and Hal really "node drivers", then sound more like > "device watcher". > Maybe the error file should state > VIR_FROM_DEVWATCH instead of VIR_FROM_NODE > then the names we pick for the internal symbols can be changed > > We will need to augment the terminology section at some point > but I'm not sure what's the best way to describe those new internal > APIs, "Node driver" doesn't really fit IMHO, "Device watcher" is a bit > better but doesn't feel great either. > > > Daniel > -- Libvir-list mailing list Libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list