On Fri, 2018-10-12 at 16:21 +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 01:09:50PM +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > > So once we have these changes in place, command line users can be > > pretty much completely isolated from libvirt defaults, just like > > virt-manager and oVirt and Nova users. Then it will be up to us > > to actually advertise these alternatives and push users away from > > virsh[1] and towards them. > > > > I wonder if showing a message suggesting to use virt-xml instead > > when 'virsh edit' or 'virsh attach-device' are called would be > > considered acceptable at that point? > > Depends what you mean by showing a message ? I'd be fine with the > virsh man page referring people to virt-xml as a companion tool. > > I would certainly not expect invokation of 'virsh edit' to print > any text on the console, as it will always be valid to want to > use "virsh edit", "virsh atach-device" or any other command > precisely because they are an almost direct passthrough to the > libvirt API without trying to inject clever logic of their own. Okay, let's forget the runtime messages then: we can mention virt-xml (and virt-install) in the documentation, write blog posts about them, and the like. Does the rest of the plan look reasonable to you? -- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
