On Tue, 6 Jun 2000, Hans Reiser wrote:
> I want to add reiserfs to linux, not merge it into ext3.
Merging it into ext3 would be ... interesting. I haven't seen any
suggestion of that, though. If there is going to be common journalling
support code available in the kernel, it makes sense for you to use it.
> This is the crux of the argument.
That wasn't my interpretation.
> Alan says I should wait until ext3 is added so that I can let them
> write part of our FS for us.
That wasn't my interpretation of it...
* ReiserFS is still a moving target, unlike NWFS, HPFS etc.
* The kernel is in a code freeze. No new "features" (like ReiserFS), some
new drivers for existings systems (including NWFS, HPFS etc.) if needed.
* ReiserFS contains code which duplicates the kernel's own journalling
support (WIP).
Any of these three points would count heavily against inclusion; the
combination should rule it out completely. Perhaps I'm slightly less
welcoming to RFS than others; the only RFS user I know personally lost the
entire partition to it.
In short, right now, I don't think it belongs in the kernel. Those with a
specific need for it can still add it as a patchset - those without a
specific need should be kept away from it until it's really ready. I do
understand that the inclusion means a lot to you and your company - but I
think you've missed the boat on this one. A 200% increase in your revenue
isn't a good enough reason to include code prematurely, especially when
that code could be included much more efficiently in a few months' time.
(Disclaimer: There's an FS I might be porting in a few months which would
benefit greatly from journalling support. It won't be competing with any
native Linux filing systems, though.)
James.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jun 07 2000 - 21:00:24 EST