| 1 |
Hi, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
On Mon, 26 Dec 2016 20:05:58 +0100 Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: |
| 4 |
> On 12/26/2016 08:45 AM, Andrew Savchenko wrote: |
| 5 |
> > 8 packages are using either rbd or rados USE flag for Rados |
| 6 |
> > Block Device support: |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Are there other possibly conflicting issues of using "rados" rather than |
| 9 |
> "rbd" as name (or "radosbd") or someting a bit more verbose than rbd. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
As was pointed out by Robin, rados and rbd are different. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Considering verbose alternatives to rbd: they may be invented, but |
| 14 |
will be non-standard and this will confuse our users: it will be |
| 15 |
similar to "portableng" instead of "png". |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Since we don't have rbd meaning conflict right now, it should be |
| 18 |
safe to use. In case of future issues, local USE may be used for |
| 19 |
alternative meanings. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Best regards, |
| 22 |
Andrew Savchenko |
Archives