Greg KH wrote: >>I know this is quite an important change, but precisely, we'd better >>change before porting the missing 30 chip drivers than after. I know how >>much work it will be - especially since I'll obviously be the one to >>cope with it - still I think we should do it. >> >>Comments, thunder and rocks welcome ;) >>Thanks. >> >>NB: May I know the name of the brilliant chooser of the new naming >>scheme? Not to blame him/her (oh well... ;)) but to know the reasons of >>his/her choice. >> >> > >That would be me. See the archives for what I propsed, and why I did >it. Of course I can't remember what I said back then, and no one seemed >to disagree... > > I think I did. I believe that Jean is proposing switching from: temp_max1 temp_min1 temp1 to temp1_max temp1_min temp1 So there still won't be multiple values in one "file", but the filenames will sort naturally into groupings similar to the way they were before. :v)
