* Kern Sibbald schrieb am 04.10.08 um 15:13 Uhr:
> Hello,
>
> Thanks for your comments.
>
> I think the best suggestion that I have seen for the name is (at least in the
> current context):
>
> Exclude Dirs Containing = .no_backup
I though about this too, but then discarded the idea beacuse I
thought it did not fit into the overall "syntax" of the bacula
configuration.
Dirs Containing = .no_backup
I think this is against the "logic" in which almost all other
directives are being built:
WildDir = <wildcard>
and its not
Dir Matching Wildcard = <wildcard>
I guess there would be many examples.
Am I too nitpicking here?
Wouldn't it be too inconsistent to introduce verbs in
Directive-Names?
>
> That seems to me to be a very good name.
>
> Concerning the placement of the directive: I think it is worth examining if
> we
> can easily move it to the Exclude { } section. In that case, the directive
> name could be
>
> Exclude {
> Dirs Containing = .no_backup
> ...
> }
I would like it! Do you think it would then be possible to put it
into an Include{} section too to have the opposite effect?
(Like I wrote ;))
-Marc
--
8AAC 5F46 83B4 DB70 8317 3723 296C 6CCA 35A6 4134
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Bacula-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-devel
