Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Thu, 10 Aug 2000 06:46:52 -0400 (EDT) | | From | Michael Rothwell <> | | Subject | Re: Definitions |
| |
On a tangent, what *is* the deal with Ext3 these days? I've not seen any news about it recently.
-M
You said...
> > hans@reiser.to said: > > This is hilarious. > > The problem Redhat faces that inspires their opposition is that they > > know that if reiserfs goes in, the US market will go the way the > > European market has, and most of them will never go back even if ext3 > > is later performance effective. Why RedHat doesn't just help ReiserFS > > rather than fight it, well, this is the puzzle to me. > > To be honest, I'm a little confused by this mail. > > For a start, Red Hat would appear to have nothing to do with this. Linus > makes these decisions. > > There was a brief period, a few weeks ago, where Alan was maintaining an -ac > series in Linus' absence, and he quite sensibly didn't accept any major new > stuff - he certainly refused to accept mine. The situation has now reverted > to normal. Code submitted to Linus may or may not go in, but nobody who > works for Red Hat can get in the way without subverting Transmeta's mail > servers. > > Hans, when was the last time the ReiserFS code was prepared as a patch in > the form that Linus prefers, and mailed directly to him? From vague memory, > I think the MTD code went in on about the tenth such submission - so please > list _all_ dates on which you've done so. > > > Secondly, I really don't understand why Red Hat should give a flying > wossname which filesystem their customers use. If anything, they should > want to give customers a _wider_ choice, to increase their brand's > attractiveness. > > It was my understanding that the European market has largely opted to buy > SuSE because it's shipped from the Free World and is fully functional as a > secure system - including SSH and other such programs which weren't > permitted to be exported from the US. > > Now I can see how _that_ could affect Red Hat's business, and hopefully now > the insane regulations are relaxed, RH7 will include the missing > functionality and they'll be on a level playing field for once. > > I really don't understand why anyone could think that Red Hat would want to > 'fight' the inclusion of ReiserFS, though. > > If anything, I would guess¹ that they'd be including it in their shipped > version of the 2.4 kernel even if Linus doesn't, to ensure that no potential > customers go off and buy SuSE instead because they need ReiserFS. > > -- > dwmw2 > > > ¹ Yes, that's a guess. Those who are paying attention may have noticed that > I've been bought by Cygnus (i.e. Red Hat), but I am not speaking for them, > don't have anything to do with the distribution, and have no clue what's > going into it. > >
- 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/
|  |