Re: [PATCH net-next v2 5/6] bonding: update Documentation for port/bond terminology

[Jarod Wilson]

On Fri, Oct 2, 2020 at 2:09 PM Andrew Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 02, 2020 at 01:40:00PM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> > Point users to the new interface names instead of the old ones, where
> > appropriate. Userspace bits referenced still include use of master/slave,
> > but those can't be altered until userspace changes too, ideally after
> > these changes propagate to the community at large.
> >
> > Cc: Jay Vosburgh <j.vosburgh@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Andy Gospodarek <andy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Thomas Davis <tadavis@xxxxxxx>
> > Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Signed-off-by: Jarod Wilson <jarod@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/networking/bonding.rst | 440 +++++++++++++--------------
> >  1 file changed, 220 insertions(+), 220 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/networking/bonding.rst b/Documentation/networking/bonding.rst
> > index adc314639085..f4c4f0fae83b 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/networking/bonding.rst
> > +++ b/Documentation/networking/bonding.rst
> > @@ -167,22 +167,22 @@ or, for backwards compatibility, the option value.  E.g.,
> >
> >  The parameters are as follows:
> >
> > -active_slave
> > +active_port
>
> Hi Jarod
>
> It is going to take quite a while before all distributions user space
> gets updated. So todays API is going to live on for a few
> years. People are going to be search the documentation using the terms
> their user space uses, which are going to be todays terms, not the new
> ones you are introducing here. For that to work, i think you are going
> to have to introduce a table listing todays names and the new names
> you are adding, so search engines have some chance of finding this
> document, and readers have some clue as to how to translate from what
> their user space is using to the terms used in the document.

Hm. Would a simple blurb describing the when the changes were made and
why at the top of bonding.rst be sufficient? And then would the rest
of the doc remain as-is (old master/slave language), or with
terminology conversions?

-- 
Jarod Wilson
jarod@xxxxxxxxxx