From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "David Dabbs" Subject: RE: Fibration questions Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2004 02:47:02 -0500 Message-ID: <20040718074618.7F15615C41@mail03.powweb.com> References: <40FA22A3.5060503@namesys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com In-Reply-To: <40FA22A3.5060503@namesys.com> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: 'Hans Reiser' Cc: reiserfs-list@namesys.com I see I'm not the only one up late. > -----Original Message----- > From: Hans Reiser [mailto:reiser@namesys.com] > Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2004 2:12 AM > To: David Dabbs > Cc: reiserfs-list@namesys.com > > > I think this is too implementation dependent of an optimization to be > allowed to influence API design. > Understood. > There is a need for support for * in filename queries. I would support > adding that to sys_reiser4. > When the time comes for investigating such support, would it mean a change to the 'sys_reiser4 syntax' (therefore the parser)? Other than a brief gloss of a web page that deals with it I haven't investigated the syscall syntax/capabilities, so pardon if this is misplaced. > If FS naming was better designed, filenames would not have extensions. > I prefer to first better design naming, and then not need to optimize > the API for extensions. While the subject of priorities is on the table, is there a 'reiser4 janitors' list' similar to the kernel janitors' list? Reading through the code I've seen a number of XXX-FIXME-HANS, etc. Would these TODOs, assuming the comments remain relevant, be (one of) the places for those wising to contribute to investigate? David