02/12/2012 12:22 PM, Marco Amadori:
> On Sunday 12 February 2012 12:15:27 anonym wrote:
>
>> The persistence RFC has been heavily updated. In particular custom
>> mounts now support options so they can either be bind-mounted,
>> recursively symlinked, or union-mounted. This has also been implemented
>> in the tmp-persistent-custom branch.
>
> I read your RFC, I would like to not change names of files or features if
> possible, and to maintain compatibility with old strings if reasonable.
>
> e.g. why renaming 'live-{rw,sn}' to 'full-{ov,sn}' ?
IMHO:
* "live" is not an intuitive name for "full system persistence".
* "rw" is not an intuitive name. I read it as "read-write" (as I guess
was intended) but snapshots are read-writable too.
> Probably is a good name by itself, I do not mean that; but why a persistence
> user should need to change their scripts for this reason?
>
> If the urge of changing the name is so compelling, it would be better to ADD a
> new name and maintain compatibility with old names in the code.
Sure, making it backwards compatible is also my goal as you can see in
the dedicated section about it. But yeah, I forgot to do it for the
live-* labels.
Cheers!
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature