Rename class DnsRecord

[mderka]

This was pointed out by the DNS team.

[jgeewax]

Errr - really? I don't love this... can we debate a bit more first.... ?

[mderka]

Oh, I did not realize this. We certainly can. Both Jacob and @aozarov thought that this was a good idea, and I kind of agree. I am restoring the comment in the doc and pausing here.

[mderka]

I renamed the issue. The final name is to be decided after some discussion. The suggestions are DnsRecordSet and ResourceRecordSet.

[ajkannan]

I slightly prefer DnsRecordSet over ResourceRecordSet, but I'm fine with either. RecordSet would be shorter; do you think it's a clear enough name?

[aozarov]

Errr - really? I don't love this... can we debate a bit more first.... ?

The issue is that what we call DnsRecord does not actually represent one DNS record but rather a set of records (and therefore is called in the underlying service API ResourceRecordSet).

BTW, it looks like this long name was adopted by gcloud-python though node choose Record (which I personally think is wrong).

I think the main point is to indicate that it is a set rather than an individual item and therefore my ordered preference would be: RecordSet, DnsRecordSet, ResourceRecordSet.
With a much stronger preference to the first.

[mderka]

After some discussion both here and internally, including the input from the DNS team, we will rename to RecordSet.