From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?utf-8?Q?Maciej_So=C5=82tysiak?= Subject: Re: future r4 maintenance question Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2006 21:51:28 +0200 Message-ID: <1287558327.20060722215128@wp.pl> References: <1992401892.20060722173244@wp.pl> <44C26870.6090200@namesys.com> Reply-To: =?utf-8?Q?Maciej_So=C5=82tysiak?= Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com In-Reply-To: <44C26870.6090200@namesys.com> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: reiserfs-list@namesys.com, reiserfs-list@namesys.com Hello Hans, Saturday, July 22, 2006, 8:03:28 PM, you wrote: > We are going to give changing the paradigm a try. The difference > between 4.1-beta and 4.0 is that different plugins are the default, and > the experimental code is in the plugins you see when mounting with the > mount option 4.1-beta. Let's see if it works in practice..... I Understand. This is good news. Hm, do you think that reiser4's pluggability is enough to have this single kernel tree (fs/reiser4) for a longer period of time. I mean, can you predict a need of spawning something like reiser5 in the forseeable future or would fs/reiser4 + plugins be enough to do away with the "future vision" and other "future *" stuff you've written about ? eg. I remember reading about very granular security ACLs like restricting a certain line in a file (like /etc/passwd) -- Best regards, Maciej