Re: libquota proposal

[christos%zoulas.com@localhost (Christos Zoulas)]

On Mar 21,  8:29pm, bouyer%antioche.eu.org@localhost (Manuel Bouyer) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: libquota proposal

| On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 03:22:18PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
| > On Mar 21,  5:25pm, bouyer%antioche.eu.org@localhost (Manuel Bouyer) wrote:
| > -- Subject: Re: libquota proposal
| > 
| > | > We should get rid of quota1 and this direct support.
| > | 
| > | maybe, but after 6.0.
| > 
| > But then are you going to go back and change quota2->quota?
| 
| This is independant.
| 
| > And if yes, why not now?
| 
| we need quota1 up to 6.0 (inclusive) for transition. But we can rename
| quota -> quota1 or oquota and quota2 -> quota now. I've already
| done so in libquota to avoid an ABI change later; the kernel option can
| be done after libquota has been commited (this is independant); the header
| merge can be done once quota1 has been removed as there should not be
| public consumers any more.

Good, I am only worried about the public API/ABI's.

christos