Andrew Morton wrote:
On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 16:22:26 -0400
Jeff Garzik <[email protected]> wrote:
I strongly disagree that ext3 should be subject to a spring cleaning.
Comments, whitespace, very very minor things, sure. Trying to get rid
of brelse() when _many_ other filesystems also use it? ext4 material.
We should seek to minimise the difficulty of cross-porting bugfixes and
enhancements. Putting cleanups in only ext4 works against that.
ext3 will be around for many years yet. We cannot just let it rot due to
some false belief that performing routine maintenance against it will for
some magical reason cause it to break.
Because ext4 is impending, you want to push a bunch of cleanups into
ext3 over a short span of time. That's not routine maintenance at all.
We're not talking about routine maintenance. In your words, we are
talking about spring cleaning.
Why not let the devel/stable system work its magic? If the cleanups are
viable, proving that first in ext4 should give us more confidence to put
them into ext3.
Cross-porting bugfixes and cleanups will _obviously_ be quite easy,
during the first few months of ext4's life.
Just look at ext2->ext3 history. Regardless of when you make the split,
there will be a bunch of stuff people wish to backport after the split
occurs. Given that, it makes more sense to testbed the changes in ext4
first.
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
