linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] bcachefs fixes for 6.16-rc4

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <fomli5univuatcdc7syty56wffm4uvslocxkufks27otyix7fl@6c5i7w7g64qo>
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2025 13:53:32 -0400
From: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
To: "Carl E. Thompson" <cet@...lthompson.net>
Cc: John Stoffel <john@...ffel.org>, 
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-bcachefs@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] bcachefs fixes for 6.16-rc4

On Wed, Jul 02, 2025 at 10:41:34AM -0700, Carl E. Thompson wrote:
> Kent, at this point in bcachefs' development you want complete control
> over your development processes and timetable that you simply can't
> get in the mainline kernel. It's in your own best interest for you to
> develop out-of-tree for now.

Carl, all I'm doing is stating up front what it's going to take to get
this done right.

I'm not particularly pushing one way or the other for bcachefs to stay
in; there are pros and cons either way. It'll be disruptive for it to be
out, but if the alternative is disrupting process too much and driving
Linus and I completely completely nuts, that's ok.

Everyone please be patient. This is a 10+ year process, no one thing is
make or break.