Re: .raw extension is misleading
On Fri, 17 May 2002, Richard Atterer wrote:
> On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 04:29:20PM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
> > On Tue, 2002-05-14 at 19:14, Richard Atterer wrote:
> > > "jigdo/", not "jigdo-area/". (Not that it really matters...)
> > I wasn't overly happy about using jigdo-area, but couldn't think of
> > anything more appropriate.
> > The reason not to call it simply "jigdo" is that the jigdo-area
> > contains one or more versioned directories, each of which contains a
> > jigdo and a snapshot directory, so having jigdo appear at two levels
> > in the hierarchy seemed likely to give rise to confusion.
> That's true.
> Why not call the topmost dir "jigdo" and leave out the second one, i.e.
> snapshot in "jigdo/2.2r6/snapshot/"
> jigdo/template files in "jigdo/2.2r6/i386"
Well, it isn't jigdo that is distributed there. It is jigdo files for use
> Or what about "cd-images"?
> snapshot in "cd-images/2.2r6/snapshot/"
> jigdo/template files in "cd-images/2.2r6/jigdo/i386"
This would seem better. I'm fine with "jigdo-area/" though.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org