Ludovic Courtès writes: > To me, another consideration is familiarity with Btrfs for those who’ll > touch the code: to someone not familiar with it, the code may be viewed > as “read-only” because it says “btrfs”. Whereas if it clearly states > that it’s just about prepending a directory name or similar, it’s easy > to reason about it. Agreed, this is where I was going to with my comment on ZFS. Maybe the "btrfs" part of the symbols can be left out to make it more general and understandable. -- Pierre Neidhardt https://ambrevar.xyz/