in reply to RFC FUSE::Remote modules

For those not familiar, Fuse stands for Filesystem in Userspace.

With regards to the name, I would just call it Fuse::FTP. If you're connecting to an ftp site, it's assumed that it's going to be remote. If it's not remote, wouldn't you just use the local filesystem instead?

Alex / talexb / Toronto

"Groklaw is the open-source mentality applied to legal research" ~ Linus Torvalds

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: RFC Fuse::Remote modules
by marto (Cardinal) on Aug 18, 2006 at 12:04 UTC
    Do'h!

    (slaps forehead)

    This is of course true, a great point well made.

    Thanks for your input talexb.

    Martin
[reply]
Re^2: RFC Fuse::Remote modules
by diotalevi (Canon) on Aug 18, 2006 at 19:23 UTC

    "Linux" in the title would be nice too. "FUSE" is an acronym isn't it? Shouldn't it be capitalized?

    ⠤⠤ ⠙⠊⠕⠞⠁⠇⠑⠧⠊

[reply]
      '"Linux" in the title would be nice too.'

      Actually I read the Supported Operating Systems section of the wiki which lists FreeBSD also, so I did not feel adding Linux to the title was ideal. I have updated the post changing Fuse to FUSE where appropriate.

      Thanks for your input.

      Martin
[reply]
        There is another (unrelated) project on CPAN named FUSE. Perl bindings for fuse have name Fuse, so I would suggest to call your module Fuse::FTP after all.

        FreeBSD support for Fuse is somewhat experimental (most of tests are broken on FreeBSD), but filesystems do work (I hope, if not, please bug me :-). There is plan to rewrite test suite which would also fix FreeBSD problems.


        2share!2flame...
[reply]

In Section Meditations