Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 3 May 2008 14:06:31 +0300 | From | Adrian Bunk <> | Subject | Re: LogFS merge |
| |
On Sat, May 03, 2008 at 12:44:12PM +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote: > Hi Adrian, > > On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 12:11 PM, Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org> wrote: > > > Why not merge it and mark it experimental then ? In fact, this is about > > > what you're looking for : reduced merge hassle and more testers. > > > > Andi already answered that one: > > > > "Merging file systems too early can quickly ruin their name and that > > taint is hard to ever get rid again then (e.g. happened to JFS)" > > > > And a stable kernel shouldn't be something for getting "more testers", > > it should be for tested code ready to be used in production. > > What you call "more testers" would be people who try it in production > > (e.g. to overcome shortcomings of JFFS2) thinking it was stable. > > > > And no, EXPERIMENTAL in the kernel is not usable for keeping people from > > trying known-whacky code. > > I think ext4 already set the precedent that you _can_ do development > within the 2.6 series, no?
I'd call the ext4 case a mistake we shouldn't repeat.
It's available in the kernel since 2006.
I've seen people using ext4 on their computers running with a corrupted filesystem since fsck was at that point not yet capable of fixing whatever was corrupted.
At least one distribution already has ext4 enabled in their kernels.
cu Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
| |