Hi Dave,
There's interest in having a mailing list specifically for "union
filesystem" like solutions (currently active projects are aufs,
union-mounts and overlayfs).
Would it be possible to create one on vger for this purpose?
Thanks,
Miklos
BTW, unionfs isn?t inactive (http://unionfs.filesystems.org, http://git.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu/?o=age).
Cheers,
Erez.
On Jun 19, 2014, at 8:36 AM, Miklos Szeredi <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Dave,
>
> There's interest in having a mailing list specifically for "union
> filesystem" like solutions (currently active projects are aufs,
> union-mounts and overlayfs).
>
> Would it be possible to create one on vger for this purpose?
>
> Thanks,
> Miklos
From: Miklos Szeredi <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2014 14:36:50 +0200
> There's interest in having a mailing list specifically for "union
> filesystem" like solutions (currently active projects are aufs,
> union-mounts and overlayfs).
>
> Would it be possible to create one on vger for this purpose?
I've created [email protected]
Dear David,
sorry for the late chime in.
On Mittwoch, 25. Juni 2014 15:54:59 David Miller wrote:
> From: Miklos Szeredi <[email protected]>
> Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2014 14:36:50 +0200
>
> > There's interest in having a mailing list specifically for "union
> > filesystem" like solutions (currently active projects are aufs,
> > union-mounts and overlayfs).
> >
> > Would it be possible to create one on vger for this purpose?
>
> I've created [email protected]
While this is a great move, it's also a little unfortunate, since it is the
name of exactly one layered filesystem solution out of 4 existing ones
(ignoring vaporware).
A neutral name would have been linux-layeredfs, and as long as nobody objects,
I kindly ask you to rename it (as in creating such a ml, and silently phase
out this one..). Given that 13 people are subscribed by now, that's hopefully
acceptable for all participants.
BTW, all solutions organize the fs join by layering them. ;)
A layered fs user since about a decade,
Pete
Sorry I'm not changing the name, it's extremely inconvenient for all of
the people maintaining archives of this list.
I also do not agree with the degree to which the name not being generic
enough matters, sorry. So I wouldn't have changed it on that grounds
anyways.
David Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
> Sorry I'm not changing the name, it's extremely inconvenient for all of
> the people maintaining archives of this list.
>
> I also do not agree with the degree to which the name not being generic
> enough matters, sorry. So I wouldn't have changed it on that grounds
> anyways.
I'm fine with sticking with it as it is.
David