[lkml]   [2001]   [Jan]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Does reiserfs really meet the "Linux-2.4.x patch submission policy"?

    On Tue, 16 Jan 2001, Aaron Lehmann wrote:
    > On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 08:55:58PM +0100, Andr? Dahlqvist wrote:
    > > I was very surprised when I checked my local mirror this
    > > morning, and noticed that the latest 2.4.1 pre-patch had grown to
    > > ~180 kb in size. I was even more surprised when I realized that the
    > > inclusion of reiserfs was the reason for this.
    > On a related note, how about XFS? It certainly shouldn't go in before
    > the developers are ready, but I've been using it without any problems
    > for awhile now and await its inclusion in the mainstream kernel.

    Note that ResierFS really is a fairly special case: it's been one of the
    main filesystems at SuSE for a longish time, and of the journalling
    filesystems it's the only one I know of that is in major real production
    use already, and has been for some time.

    There's no question that there are other Journalling filesystems on the
    horizon, but I'm not hearing anybody who can't do the patching themselves
    who is interested in using it. Remember: one of the main criteria for
    2.4.x inclusion was the "vendor would want it" part. If it's a "developers
    might want to play with it" kind of thing, then it might as well live as
    an external patch for a while.

    For that reason, I would expect Ext3 to be the next filesystem to be
    integrated, but I would _also_ expect that RedHat will actually integrate
    it into their kernel _first_, and expect me to integrate it into the
    standard kernel only afterwards.

    But no, vendors aren't everything. And there are other vendors than just
    SuSE and RedHat. So take all of the above with a pinch of salt. And
    remember: these are just the 2.4.x rules - it's a different game when the
    development kernel opens again, and "vendor wishes" are much less of an
    issue when that happens. In the meantime, I see the stable kernel mainly
    as a way to support vendors, and am thus always weighing things from that
    angle when worrying about 2.4.x features.


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:15    [W:0.028 / U:91.108 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site