Mike Snitzer wrote:
Developers never _want_ to branch (maintenance-hell), the question becomes: do the risks associated with ext3-with-extents' backword incompatibility _really_ justify the branch?
It's also a question of... why keep adding modernizing features to ext3, thus keeping it on life support, but just barely? If we are going to modernize the _main Linux filesystem_, let's not do it in a way that is slow, and ties our hands.
Jeff - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- From: Alex Tomas <[email protected]>
- Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- References:
- [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- From: Mingming Cao <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- From: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>
- Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- From: Alex Tomas <[email protected]>
- Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- From: Jeff Garzik <[email protected]>
- Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- From: Alex Tomas <[email protected]>
- Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- From: Jeff Garzik <[email protected]>
- Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- From: Alex Tomas <[email protected]>
- Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- From: Jeff Garzik <[email protected]>
- Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- From: "Mike Snitzer" <[email protected]>
- [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- Prev by Date: Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- Next by Date: Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- Previous by thread: Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- Next by thread: Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- Index(es):
 |