At 09:55 AM 9/11/2002 -0500, Shawn wrote:
>Which is why I pointed out that the issue at hand was not regarding the
>everything else, but in fact the actual filesystem support.
I was just trying to say that everything _appears_ to be on track from my
(remote) perspective. I've noticed no gripes from the XFS team, only
evidence that development continues. If there are 6 lines of generic code
changes left, that means a lot has happened.
>As far as why the rest is still pending, I was just offering ideas.
>
>A lot of this thread is advocacy as opposed to substantive conversation
>about the how and/or why/why not of inclusion of XFS into mainline.
Advocacy without technical meat sucks.
>Fankly, there is no /real/ answer except "Linus has not weighed in on
>the current question".
Hey, maybe he's trying to convince (blackmail;) them to port some bandwidth
guarantee stuff ;))))) (I hope that's enough smilies)
>I lost my ability to invest emotions in either side of huge kernel
>debates when the devfs and lvm wars happened.
I love it when the heavyweights square off (oooo:). Unfortunately, that often
leads to a bunch of dipsticks hollering "food fight!" ;-)
-Mike
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Sep 15 2002 - 22:00:26 EST