Re: Prefix / Naming USERCR API

[Oren Laadan <orenl-eQaUEPhvms7ENvBUuze7eA@public.gmane.org>]

Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
> | > So, what would be a good prefix ?
> | > 
> | > 	cr_
> | > 		cr_checkpoint.h, libcr.a
> | > 		cr_checkpoint() cr_restart() cr_freeze() cr_migrate()
> | > 		struct cr_checkpoint_args, struct cr_restart_args
> | > 	acr_ 
> | > 		Only advantage over 'cr_' is lesser likelihood of collision
> | > 
> | > 		acr_checkpoint.h, libacr.a
> | > 		acr_checkpoint() acr_restart() acr_freeze() acr_migrate()
> | > 		struct acr_checkpoint_args, struct acr_restart_args
> | > 
> | > 	lxcr_	
> | > 		lxcr_checkpoint.h, liblxcr.a 
> | > 		lxcr_checkpoint() lxcr_restart() lxcr_freeze() lxcr_migrate()
> | > 		struct lxcr_checkpoint_args, struct lxcr_restart_args
> | 
> | I do not think lxcr_ prefix is a good choice as lxc is about container
> | and could use different libraries for the checkpoint/restart function.
> 
> I was thinking of lx as short for linux, but ok. we can drop lxcr_.
> 
> Any NACKS to 'acr_' ? If not, I will go with it - for now :-)
> 

I vote for 'cr_' to match the terminology we use in the docs
and emails ('c/r').

... and for brevity :p

Oren.