Hi,
I'm like 2-weeks behind on my kernel traffic issue reading, but I felt
the need to express some opinions on the Mar 12-18 discussion of including
reiserfs into the 2.3 and/or pre-2.4 tree.
In particular, Linus posed the question "Do we suddenly expect code to be
bug-free before inclusion into the kernel?"
My opinion is "it depends". to me, a FS is a big inclusion, experimental
or not..moreso because this particular type is a very-desired feature.
Personally, I've never used reiserfs, but from what i've read (who said
dont believe what you read?) I dont like the idea of its inclusion anytime
before 2.5.
I've seen linux come under the microscope more and more, by software
reviews, competitors, the press, and by the public in general. We're no
longer a hobbyist's OS as most people know, and i feel much standardizing
is in order. Specific thoughts..
1) Have a set number of versions for a developer tree. Say, "ok, this tree
will only go up to 2.3.60/2.5.60/2.7.60, after that, we're going
stable" If that means waiting longer between each version to fix
things, so be it. At least you know where you are and where you have to
be feature-wise/stability-wise at a certain point in time.
2) Sub-version developer's series. Not necessarily by visible version
numbers, but in principle..in a standard. It looks like this currently
happens loosely, but I feel something needs to be in stone.
For example, if we decide to stop the tree at .60 say "ok, from .1->.15
we'll take anything, from .16->.30 we won't take xxxx drivers", from
.31->.45 we won't take xxxx drivers or new filesystems", etc...
I'm all for getting new stuff tested out in the real world AMAP, but I can
see it now..software reviewer picks up 2.4, compiles in reiserfs support
(even reading the "this is experimental!" note), uses it, and it trashes
his data, and then writing a review on 2.4 to the likes "the new,
long-awaited journaling FS in linux sucks, it trashed all my data" not
mentioning in the review that the docs said it was experimental code.
Let's face it, reviewers/reporters can omit whatever pertinant info they
feel like.. Tabloids spring to mind.
God forbid we let some little show-stopping buglet slip past, into an
early 2.4 and the press catches wind. Maybe i'm being overdramatic.
but since 2.2, PR has become INCREASINGLY more important to us, whether we
like it or not.
Of course, these are all opinions from a lowly network admin..flame me,
praise me, tell me to shut up, all are welcome in my inbox :-)
-- Tony
.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-.
Anthony J. Biacco Network Administrator/Engineer
admin@intergrafix.net Intergrafix Internet Services
"Dream as if you'll live forever, live as if you'll die today"
http://www.asteroid-b612.org http://www.intergrafix.net
.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-.
-
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 : Fri Apr 07 2000 - 21:00:17 EST