On Tue, 2007-05-15 at 21:19 +0200, Jörn Engel wrote: > On Tue, 15 May 2007 15:07:05 -0400, John Stoffel wrote: > > > > I've been semi watching this, and the only comment I really can give > > is that I hate the name. To me, logfs implies a filesystem for > > logging purposes, not for Flash hardware with wear leveling issues to > > be taken into account. > > Yeah, well, ... > > Two years ago when I started all this, I was looking for a good name. > All I could come up with sounded stupid, so I picked "LogFS" as a code > name. As soon as I find a better name, the code name should get > replaced. > > By now I still don't have anything better. All alternatives that were > proposed are just as bad - with the added disadvantage of being new and > not established yet. My hope of ever finding a better name is nearly > zero. Personally I'd just go for 'JFFS3'. After all, it has a better claim to the name than either of its predecessors :) -- dwmw2 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
