Announce re-factor all current xfstests patches request

Rich Johnston rjohnston at sgi.com
Wed Mar 27 11:42:35 CDT 2013


On 03/27/2013 08:46 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 08:23:07AM -0500, Rich Johnston wrote:
>> All xfstest developers,
>>
>> Thanks again for all your time in submitting and reviewing patches
>> for xfstests.  The latest patchset posted here:
>>
>> http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2013-03/msg00467.html
>>
>> requires all current patches to be re-factored.
>
> Given that we are now segregating patches into subdirectories, is it
> correct in the future tests should be named descriptively, instead of
> using 3 digit NNN numbers (which has been a major pain from a central
> assignment perspective)?
Yes
>
> If so, is there a suggested naming convention that is being recommended?
>
> Thanks for getting this change merged in!!
>
> 					- Ted
>

I suggest:

1. They should also be descriptive of the test rather than a number.
2. All lowercase letters separated by _

i.e.
something like
tests/$FSTYP/break_my_filesystem

Thanks
--Rich




More information about the xfs mailing list