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-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
