lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Jun]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: reiser4 plugins
    Hans Reiser wrote:

    >So you fundamentally reject the prototype it in one fs and then abstract
    >it to others development model?
    >
    >

    Hans,
    after many years here now, one would have thought you would have "got"
    this part of Linux: kernel development & code that gets into the kernel
    only does so by getting past the benevolent dictators.
    instead, it seems that every time there is ReiserFS to be merged (and we
    can go back in history a number of years here..), it always seems to
    come as a great shock that your code won't be merged 'as-is' without
    peer review & comment.

    don't feel that you're being singled out here. you aren't. there isn't
    any anti-Hans-and-his-filesystem conspiracy here.
    there are plenty of examples on where this has happened in Linux
    previously in other parts of the tree.
    EVMS is a great example of similar things - a proposal to include kernel
    code to do various volume-mgmt functions - which was basically
    accomplishing the same goal as that of LVM/LVM2 and MD drivers (& DM
    framework).
    the EVMS team are a great act to follow - see
    http://lwn.net/Articles/14714/ - they showed high levels of professional
    conduct and made what was essentially a 'hard' but 'correct' decision in
    reworking EVMS to use the same DM infrastructure as LVM2.
    there are countless other examples at various times - various
    'competing' IPv6 projects, IPSec, various "hardware" (software) RAID
    controllers, various IP offload schemes et al.

    why does Reiserfs have to be any different?

    you know that VFS is the mechanism in Linux. you know (i hope..) how it
    works. it isn't so hard to see how many of the Reiser4 "plug-ins" could
    be tied into VFS calls.
    OR, if they cannot TODAY, propose how VFS _COULD_ be made to do this.

    the key here is trust. and trust is a two-way street.

    the irony of this whole thread is that history is repeating itself. see
    http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0112.1/0519.html
    kernel developers pushed back on you 3 years ago - in 2001 - what has
    really changed?

    *an observation*

    cheers,

    lincoln.
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-06-24 04:35    [W:0.040 / U:2.380 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site