linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] bcachefs changes for 6.17

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-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <438041ff-b54a-457b-8a5e-04af81a3e358@googlemail.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2025 19:29:26 +0200
From: Peter Schneider <pschneider1968@...glemail.com>
To: Malte Schröder <malte.schroeder@...ip.de>,
 Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>,
 Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-bcachefs@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] bcachefs changes for 6.17

Am 05.08.2025 um 23:19 schrieb Malte SchrÃ¶der:

> So, no merge yet? That really is a bummer. I was really hoping to
> finally be able to run mainline Linux again on my boxes (yes, I
> converted all of them to bcachefs early this year), now that pretty much
> all issues I was hitting are fixed by this merge request.
> 
> I mean, at the rate Kent's tree is stabilizing right now I am actually
> considering moving some productive systems over there. But those will
> need to run distro kernels. So, please merge, I don't want to jump
> through the hoops to run OpenZFS ...

I'm just a user, but please allow me to chime in with my 2 cts:

Linux is much better and more useful to more users WITH bcachefs included than it would be 
without it. Throwing it out or even only freezing it would hurt Linux users, only to 
please Linus' ego for a short amount of time. I don't think that's a good trade-off, and 
that certainly (IMHO) would be a very bad decision. Also, it would be a big violation of 
the promise to not break userspace. How could you possibly break userspace more than by 
needlessly throwing out a much needed filesystem that is in active use?

Of course, Kent has, to some extent, not quite adhered to the letter of the process, but 
as I see it, he did so only to show responsibility towards his users, and this is a good 
thing. We should wish for all developers and maintainers to have this much sense of 
responsibility. We need people who care, and not just bureaucratically follow a strict 
process that in this case was not designed to handle the criticality of the situation for 
the affected users.

Linus, long time ago, in a Google talk about (then new) SCM tool git, you said that a 
distributed workflow is all about respecting other people's decisions, even if sometimes 
you don't fully agree with them. Kent's pull request in the last cycle which is the source 
of this quarrel is one you could and should, in hindsight, have respected as Kent's 
responsible decision!

So Linus, may I humbly ask you to please merge!

Beste Grüße,
Peter Schneider

-- 
Climb the mountain not to plant your flag, but to embrace the challenge,
enjoy the air and behold the view. Climb it so you can see the world,
not so the world can see you.                    -- David McCullough Jr.

OpenPGP:  0xA3828BD796CCE11A8CADE8866E3A92C92C3FF244
Download: https://www.peters-netzplatz.de/download/pschneider1968_pub.asc
https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=pschneider1968@googlemail.com
https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=pschneider1968@gmail.com