vfs_fruit option fruit:resource

[Ralph Böhme]

Hi,

first, thanks to all of you who for sharing your thought about this!

On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 06:46:23PM +0100, Andreas Schneider wrote:
> On Tuesday, 8 November 2016 09:35:23 CET Jeremy Allison wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 02:15:51PM +0100, Ralph Böhme wrote:
> > > Option 1) that means for me, still thinking about it...
> > 
> > Can't we just make 'fruit:resource' and 'fruit:ressource'
> > synonyms, and accept either ? That's the way we've handled
> > such things in the past.
> 
> Well if the manpage states 'fruit:resource', with the correct
> spelling!

yeah, that was my initial reaction as well.

> How many users do you think used the incorrect spelling? How many users dive 
> to the source code to find incorrect spelled options?

Very few and those could be dealt with by accepting both the correct
and the wrong spelling, ie 'fruit:resource' and 'fruit:ressource'.

But what makes it worse, is users who have set 'fruit:resource=stream'
which the module silently ignored and so the default
'fruit:resource=file' was being used.

Both setting result in incompatible ways of storing OS X specific data
(the resource fork). Once should never change this setting after using
a system in production and putting data on it.

Which means that the poor user from above would "loose" access to this
data after an upgrade that fixes that vfs_fruit option parsing,
because suddenly the option is used.

Cheerio!
-slow