Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> Why not --with-uuid-implementation=<impl>, and have <impl> be one of
> e2utils, bsd, ossp, with the latter being default? We could also have
> offer the value "list" or "help" which would list the available options.
> That way, if we come up with a new implementation in the future, this is
> easily extensible.
The problem is that the long-established spelling is --with-ossp-uuid.
I don't think we can break that case. While we could set up something
like what you propose alongside it, it doesn't seem like there's any
advantage to doing so compared to inventing --with-foo-uuid as needed.
In either case, the problem remains of exactly what to call the
e2fsprogs-derived implementation. It does seem that people who are
familiar with these libraries call it that, but I'm worried that such
a name will confuse those not so familiar.
regards, tom lane
