From: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com>
To: Roopa Prabhu <roopa@cumulusnetworks.com>
Cc: Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@cumulusnetworks.com>,
David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>, Phil Sutter <phil@nwl.cc>,
Eric Garver <egarver@redhat.com>,
Tomas Dolezal <todoleza@redhat.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@gnu.org>,
netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH iproute2-next] Introduce ip-brctl shell script
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2019 11:05:43 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190125110543.35693aee@elisabeth> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJieiUhEzff7ukTpoch5bRkL-9Rc5pe1PibNjRcqput7JxFOWQ@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Roopa,
On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 08:33:27 -0800
Roopa Prabhu <roopa@cumulusnetworks.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 7:09 AM Nikolay Aleksandrov
> <nikolay@cumulusnetworks.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> > IMO the effort should be towards improving iproute2 to be
> > easier to use and more intuitive. We should be pushing people to
> > use the new tools instead of trying to find workarounds to keep the
> > old tools alive. I do like to idea of deprecating bridge-utils, but
> > I think it should be done via improving ip/bridge enough to be
> > pleasant to use. We will have to maintain this compatibility layer
> > forever if it gets accepted and we'll never get rid of brctl this
> > way.
>
> +1, we should move people away from brtcl. there is enough confusion
> among users looking at bridge attributes.,
>
> ip -d link show
> bridge -d link show
> brctl
Why is this confusing? One can simply pick the most appropriate tool.
> Adding a 4th one to the list is not going to ease the confusion.
Why do you say I'm adding a fourth (I guess) tool? I'm replacing the
third one.
> We should try to make the 'ip -d link show and bridge -d link show'
> outputs better. Any suggestions there from people will be useful.
To be honest, I don't see any problem with them -- they just do
different things.
--
Stefano
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-25 10:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-18 17:00 [PATCH iproute2-next] Introduce ip-brctl shell script Stefano Brivio
2019-01-23 15:09 ` Nikolay Aleksandrov
2019-01-23 16:33 ` Roopa Prabhu
2019-01-25 10:05 ` Stefano Brivio [this message]
2019-01-28 5:08 ` Roopa Prabhu
2019-01-28 7:57 ` Stefano Brivio
2019-01-30 22:30 ` Roopa Prabhu
2019-01-31 12:46 ` Stefano Brivio
2019-01-31 16:28 ` Roopa Prabhu
2019-02-05 22:50 ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-02-06 10:55 ` Stefano Brivio
2019-01-25 10:04 ` Stefano Brivio
2019-01-30 4:51 ` David Ahern
2019-01-30 10:55 ` Stefano Brivio
2019-01-31 5:12 ` David Ahern
2019-01-31 12:46 ` Stefano Brivio
2019-01-31 12:49 ` Stefano Brivio
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190125110543.35693aee@elisabeth \
--to=sbrivio@redhat.com \
--cc=buytenh@gnu.org \
--cc=dsahern@gmail.com \
--cc=egarver@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nikolay@cumulusnetworks.com \
--cc=phil@nwl.cc \
--cc=roopa@cumulusnetworks.com \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=todoleza@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).