Re: [RFC/WIP PATCH 05/11] transport: add infrastructure to support a protocol version number

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 03:01:09PM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote:

> +	OPT_STRING('y', "transport-version", &transport_version,
> +		   N_("transport-version"),
> +		   N_("specify transport version to be used")),

Interesting choice for the short option ("-v" would be nice, but
obviously it is taken). Do we want to delay on claiming the
short-and-sweet 'y' until we are sure this is something people will use
a lot? In an ideal world, it is not (i.e., auto-upgrade and other tricks
become good enough that nobody bothers to specify it manually).

-Peff
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]