Re: XFS for 2.4

[Stephan von Krawczynski <skraw@ithnet.com>]

On Tue, 2 Dec 2003 09:22:48 -0200 (BRST)
Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com> wrote:

> [...]
> A development tree is much different from a stable tree. You cant just
> simply backport generic VFS changes just because everybody agreed with
> them on the development tree.
> 
> My whole point is "2.6 is almost out of the door and its so much better".  
> Its much faster, much cleaner. 

Even if I am a bit off-topic here, please reconsider your last sentence. Don't
make people think that 2.6 is in a widely useable state right now. Just take a
look at the history of 2.4. Don't forget 2.4 can be used in boxes beyond 4 GB
only right _now_ (2.4.23), all previous versions fall completely apart on i386
platform. 2.4 is right now nice, useable and pretty stable - and 2.6 has not
even begun to see the real-and-ugly world yet. There will for sure be a lot of
interesting test cases during the next months for 2.6, but there are quite an
amount of people that need a real stable environment - and that's why they will
have to use 2.4 for at least one year from now on.

This is no vote for or against XFS-inclusion, I don't know the thing at all. I
only want to state: developer environment is pretty different from the real
world, so don't dump 2.4 too early please.

Regards,
Stephan