[lkml]   [2010]   [Sep]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [Scst-devel] Fwd: Re: linuxcon 2010...
    Dmitry Torokhov, on 09/07/2010 04:44 AM wrote:
    >> So at this point, I will once again to refrain from any non technical
    >> interaction with yourself. If you have geninue concerns about any of
    >> the TCM/LIO v4 code, then I suggest that you and your devels make them
    >> known from within threads containing [PATCH] and [RFC] tags, because I
    >> will not be bothering with anything that does not contain comments on
    >> creating new or improving existing design and code.
    > I think this is somewhat backwards...
    > Vlad appears to be asserting that SCST is more feature-complete that LIO
    > at this point. It also seems that LIO is somewhat younger than SCST. So
    > at this point it might be interesting to see:
    > 1. What are the shortcomings of SCST design compared to LIO and why LIO
    > developers chose to come with their own solution instead of
    > collaborating with SCST folks?
    > 2. What features are missing from SCST that are currently available in
    > LIO?
    > Once this is sorted out and [most] everyone agrees that LIO is indeed
    > technically superior (even if maybe not as mature yet) solution, then it
    > would make sense to request SCST developers to go to file/line depth of
    > the review.

    Those are exactly the questions trying to hear answers on which I'm
    hitting the wall in past time.


     \ /
      Last update: 2010-09-07 22:17    [W:4.019 / U:26.124 seconds]
    ©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site