Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030469AbXBLXS1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Feb 2007 18:18:27 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030472AbXBLXS1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Feb 2007 18:18:27 -0500 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.33.17]:43869 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030469AbXBLXS0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Feb 2007 18:18:26 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to: mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: content-disposition:references; b=l2g7jjg/DbxuKXu4EGQr+cbC595zGhSlZuI7OOxIwxArh7KXrcVvjOn7t5LQru2YE uabCMcPrt7HcSOnMF1fqg== Message-ID: <6599ad830702121518w7e02f51fv93391bed059141d7@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 15:18:20 -0800 From: "Paul Menage" To: "Serge E. Hallyn" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] containers (V7): Generic Process Containers Cc: "Sam Vilain" , akpm@osdl.org, pj@sgi.com, sekharan@us.ibm.com, dev@sw.ru, xemul@sw.ru, vatsa@in.ibm.com, ebiederm@xmission.com, containers@lists.osdl.org, winget@google.com, rohitseth@google.com, ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20070212224717.GB19604@sergelap.austin.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20070212081521.808338000@menage.corp.google.com> <45D0EC68.9090009@vilain.net> <20070212224717.GB19604@sergelap.austin.ibm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 835 Lines: 18 On 2/12/07, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > Well it's an unfortunate conflict, but I don't see where we have any > standing to make Paul change his terminology :) I have no huge problem with changing my terminology in the interest of wider adoption. "Container" seems like an appropriate name for the abstraction, and possibly more appropriate than for a virtual server, but if it was decreed that the only thing stopping the container patch being merged was that it should be called, say, "Process Sets", I would happily s/container/pset/g across the entire patchset. Paul - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/