On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 10:16:34AM +0500, Roman Mamedov wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 14:32:10 -0700
> Mark Fasheh <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > Can we please have seperate and obvious namespaces for in-band dedupe and
> > out-of-band dedupe commands? I realize that there is no oob-dedupe
> > funcationality in btrfs-progs today but I would like to avoid confusing
> > users in the case that this code hits btrfs-progs.
> > 
> > Specifically by this, I mean I'd like to see anything except 'dedupe' as the
> > btrfs command, so a user who sees 'btrfs dedupe ....' is not confusing the
> > two forms we have.
> > 
> > I don't personally care what other name is used and of course it could have
> > 'dedupe' in the name just not solely 'dedupe'. As a poor example, we could
> > call it 'btrfs inband-dedupe ...'.
> 
> There might be no such code added ever -- but everyone will be stuck with
> typing "inband-dedupe" instead of the simple and short "dedupe" forever
> because of this "future precaution".
> 
> At least make that "dedupe-inband", so that the shorthand form of "dedupe"
> also works for now, and only starts throwing a warning if any other subcommand
> starting with "dedupe" is added.

This sounds like a good idea to me. Alternatively it could be 'idedupe'
and if we ever need the out-of-band, we could call it like 'fdedupe'
(file dedupe).
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to