Re: Announce re-factor all current xfstests patches request

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

 



On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 08:23:07AM -0500, Rich Johnston wrote:
> All xfstest developers,
> 
> Thanks again for all your time in submitting and reviewing patches
> for xfstests.  The latest patchset posted here:
> 
> http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2013-03/msg00467.html
> 
> requires all current patches to be re-factored.

Given that we are now segregating patches into subdirectories, is it
correct in the future tests should be named descriptively, instead of
using 3 digit NNN numbers (which has been a major pain from a central
assignment perspective)?

If so, is there a suggested naming convention that is being recommended?

Thanks for getting this change merged in!!

					- Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Reiser Filesystem Development]     [Ceph FS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Yosemite National Park]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Media]

  Powered by Linux