Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 14 Apr 2008 16:55:04 -0400 | From | Jeff Garzik <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/7] OMFS filesystem version 3 |
| |
Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 09:16:39AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: >> I think the exceed them quite easily. The costs are almost nil, while >> merging this provides another nice example fs (and one much easier to >> follow than ext*) for hardware that does have a few users and will no >> doubt get many more >> >> I wasn't aware Linus had introduced a new rule required 500 people sign >> up to use a feature before it gets added ? > > I'm also very surprised by this, especially as it seems to be applied > very selectively. This filesystems is an almost 0 maintainance burden > unlike a lot of really crappy driver we're shoving in constantly. > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >
Agreed. And adding to the pile-on, I think that we should be _encouraging_ rather than discouraging innovative new filesystems.
I rather dislike limiting filesystem maintenance to the "old guard".
See comments like those on Evgeniy's blog: http://tservice.net.ru/~s0mbre/blog/devel/fs/2008_04_14.html
Sure we do not need to merge every filesystem under the sun, or things that much better belong in userspace (sshfs), but AFAICS there is not a huge increase in maintenance cost to add a new kernel filesystem.
Jeff
| |