On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 11:01:45PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 10:16:11PM +0100, Christophe Fergeau wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 09:51:34AM +0100, Christophe Fergeau wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 02:26:02AM +0200, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote: > > > > + */ > > > > +gboolean gvir_domain_get_saved(GVirDomain *dom) > > > > > > The naming needs to be more explicit, libvirt will suspend the domain after > > > a call to virDomainSave or virDomainManagedSave, the current name only > > > checks for the latter state. I'd go for > > > gvir_domain_has_managed_save_image(); > > > > I see this patch has been pushed to master with this part unchanged and no > > discussion whatsoever on the list, what happened there? > > Oh, I ACK'd his new patch, without noticing your message in this > thread. > > I tend to agree with your suggestion to rename to > > gvir_domain_has_managed_save_image() Actually, looking more closely at the API, virDomainManagedSave is wrapped in gvir_domain_save, so gvir_domain_has_managed_save_image would be inconsistent. However, _get_saved is a very confusing name for me, gvir_domain_is_saved would fit much better, but we already had this discussion... Christophe
Attachment:
pgpTK7RxfIj7h.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list