lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Apr]   [23]   [last100]   RSS-feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Complete thread (EXPERIMENTAL)
/
DateMon, 23 Apr 2007 10:40:42 -0700
FromAndrew Morton <>
SubjectRe: Question about Reiser4
Digg This
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 06:52:16 -0700
Eric Hopper <hopper@omnifarious.org> wrote:

On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 01:04:45AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
The namesys engineers continue to maintain reiser4 and I continue to receive patches for it.

Right now I'd say that the main blockages for reiser4 are a) the developers aren't presently asking for inclusion (afaik) and b) lack of reviewing effort from other kernel developers.

If someone else started asking for it to be included and responded to requests for the various code changes required to increase its quality to the required level, wouldn't that be enough? Basically, if someone forked it.

Or does it specifically have to be namesys engineers?

That's not where the problem lies - the namesys guys are responsive and play well with others. But they haven't received any "requests for the various code changes" in over a year.

And I'm in the same boat as most everyone else: I haven't looked at the reiser4 code in ages. Right now I don't have anything like a list of outstanding technical issues.

To get it unstuck we'd need a general push, get people looking at and testing the code, get the vendors to have a serious think about it, etc. We could do that - it'd require that the namesys people (and I) start making threatening noises about merging it, I guess.

Or we could move all the reiser4 code into kernel/sched.c - that seems to get people fired up.
\
ISP Services
Valid XHTML 1.0!\ /
Valid CSS! Last update: 2007-04-23 17:43    [W:0.350 / U:0.110 seconds]
©2003-2005 Jasper Spaans