[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <adaocyppco5.fsf@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2009 14:26:34 -0800
From: Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
To: Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Btrfs for mainline
> > > I don't disagree, please do keep in mind that I'm not suggesting anyone
> > > use this in production yet.
> > When it's in mainline I suspect people will start using it for that.
> I think the larger question here is where we want development to happen.
> I'm definitely not pretending that btrfs is perfect, but I strongly
> believe that it will be a better filesystem if the development moves to
> mainline where it will attract more eyeballs and more testers.
One possibility would be to mimic ext4 and register the fs as "btrfsdev"
until it's considered stable enough for production. I agree with the
consensus that we want to use the upstream kernel as a nexus for
coordinating btrfs development, so I don't think it's worth waiting a
release or two to merge something.
- R.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists