On Mon, 13 Mar 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > The code duplication in fs/reiserfs/ is a bug. But does this bug harm anything
> > but maybe somewhat performance? If it does not harm, there is no reason for
>
> It does because if it goes in then nobody will get around to cleaning it up
> promptly.
>
> > reiserfs not to make in pre-2.4 kernels, because those bugs can be fixed. The
> > win is at least an as EXPERIMENTAL marked journaling filesystem, and people who
>
> Stop a moment
>
> IF reiserfs is marked as experimental then people shouldnt be using it for
> a production system - yes
>
Yes, no question at all. Our 2.2 code has been through much more testing
than the 2.3 port. Once the testers decide it is stable (with old format
support as well), I'd like to remove the experimental/beta qualification.
I think the code will be ready for this early in the 2.4 life cycle.
I'm trying to be very up front about what works, and what needs testing.
> Now if that is the case merging in 2.5, or having it as an add on patch some
> vendors and many others will apply is no problem
Certainly reiserfs doesn't die as a project if we miss 2.4. But, I think
the being in 2.4 will rapidly make it a better filesystem than it could be
as an add on patch.
-chris
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Mar 15 2000 - 21:00:24 EST