On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 3:48 AM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Sawada Masahiko <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
>> this might be difficult to call this as --concurrently.
>> It might need to be change the name.
>
> I'm OK to say that as --concurrently if the document clearly
> explains that restriction. Or --almost-concurrently? ;P
By reading that I am thinking as well about a wording with "lock",
like --minimum-locks.
--
Michael
