On Feb 10 2008 12:27, David Greaves wrote:
>> 
>> I do not see anything wrong by specifying the SB location as a metadata
>> version. Why should not location be an element of the raid type?
>> It's fine the way it is IMHO. (Just the default is not :)
>
>There was quite a discussion about it.
>
>For me the main argument is that for most people seeing superblock versions
>(even the manpage terminology is version and subversion) will correlate
>incremental versions with improvement.
>They will therefore see v1.2 as 'the latest and best'.
>Feel free to argue that the manpage is clear on this - but as we know, not
>everyone reads the manpages in depth...

That is indeed suboptimal (but I would not care since I know the
implications of an SB at the front);

Naming it "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" / "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" / "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" or so 
would address this.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to