For the Cinder project, the admin docs currently refer to the Volume service and the Volume API, with an explanation about the cinder services replacing the nova-volume service here.[1] Going forward, should we use "Block Storage" instead of volumes throughout the admin docs and is there a good reason to keep "volumes" as what the Managing Volumes chapter [2] describes? What are the differentiators so we can give guidance on the naming convention going forward? I ask because the openstack/volume-api repo has a doc patch proposed now that uses Block Storage throughout, and John Griffth, the Cinder PTL, prefers that term and also named the project Cinder Block Storage. I'm fine with Block Storage but then wondered what affect the naming choice has on the current admin docs. Input needed, thanks! Anne 1. http://docs.openstack.org/trunk/openstack-compute/admin/content/overview-block-storage-arch.html 2. http://docs.openstack.org/trunk/openstack-compute/admin/content/managing-volumes.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-docs/attachments/20121218/850a342d/attachment.html>