2008/015 svccfg refresh subcommand

[James Carlson]

Liane Praza writes:
> James Carlson wrote:
> Refresh often works for non-SMF configuration as well, which means that 
> we'd be introducing a requirement to interact with svccfg for a common 
> set of services which have no such operational requirement today.

OK; good point.  I wasn't looking at the foreign restarters.

> > It seems you disagree, though, and I don't really have strong feelings
> > on it, so I'll fold.  :-/
> 
> I'm not convinced that the choice to obsolete svcadm refresh is obvious, 
> thus my bias would be to preserve existing, well-known interface.

The fuzzy line for me was the idea of having the same subcommand in
two very closely related administrative commands.

> If anyone thinks that a few more days of discussion will help clarify we 
> can convert to a fasttrack, but I admit I suspect this is a personal 
> preference type of discussion.

Probably so.  I've at least convinced myself that if it is a problem,
it can be fixed just as easily later, so I don't need to see a timer
here.

(Plus, I know I'd be holding up something pretty important for a
concern that's pretty marginal ...)

> If it's clear it's a more natural administrative model, we'll see advice 
> on public mailing lists and in documentation move rapidly away from 
> svcadm refresh, and I'll be happy to file the obsolescence case if that 
> happens.  I'm always happy to obsolete things people don't use. :)

;-}

-- 
James Carlson, Solaris Networking              <james.d.carlson at sun.com>
Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive        71.232W   Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.496N   Fax +1 781 442 1677