Comment # 9
on bug 1109
from Nathan Scott
(In reply to comment #8)
> (In reply to comment #7)
> > > According to a little experiment here, docker-1.6 (f21) actually behaves
> > > in the way that I proposed: ambiguous container prefixes are rejected.
> >
> > OK, sold - we should follow that.
>
> Considering "It's an important usability issue, it absolutely must match
> Docker behaviour.", how is that going?
Hmm, somehow missed this question earlier. The "important usability issue ...
must match Docker" refered to being able to specify Docker containers in both
shortened form (as in, "docker ps" form), full long ID form, or via their human
readable name - all of which are sensibly unique for some value of sensible,
IMO.
Handling bizarre input like --container=0 or similar can certainly be improved,
as discussed, but I don't think it warrants higher priority than the many other
issues / requests from actual users. I'll get back to it as soon as I can
though, fear not.