On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 03:05:12PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > What do you think about renaming the existing tests from NNN to > NNN-descriptive-name? That way it will be easier for people who are > trying to track regressions, since they can easily map from the new > more descriptive name to the old test number for comparison purposes > (i.e., to see whether a failure is a regression or not, etc.) It does seem like a good idea to help people map from descriptive names to their previous numeric file names. But do we want to bake it in to the file names forevermore? Would it be good enough to start the old tests with something like _was_test_nr 45 that spits out the old test number in the log? Just thinking out loud over here. - z -- 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
