Comment 37 for bug 822979

On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 12:40 AM, Kapil Thangavelu
<email address hidden> wrote:
>>
>> Let me know if that's not what you want. And btw, dropping the website
>> interface shouldn't be an issue here as it's not yet in the charm
>> store.
>>
>
> The big thing i want todo is drop the ambiguity, ie no redundancy on
> client interface names ('cluster', 'rest', 'website', 'client').. ideally
> we'd just have a single simple name 'client'... 'rest' is fine.
>
> It simplifies the documentation and is compatible with extant charms, just
> that they need to add/remove relation if they upgrade (to a new charm of a
> different series which seems like a good time for us to fix the bad
> practices).

Right.

>
>
>> >
>> > well the rest name is internal to elasticsearch, i'd be just as happy
>> > renaming them to 'client' but renaming relation names is quite tricky
>> > against extant systems.
>>
>> If you think we should add the 'client' relation now for going
>> forward, happy to do that, but it'd mean 3 relations doing the same
>> thing.
>>
>
> per above, i'd say drop the others. we can do doc fixes in kibana/indexer
> to remove using relation names.

Done with r21. I'll update one of my deploys today to use 'client' instead.