Re: [GIT PULL] Squashfs pull request for 2.6.29

[Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de>]

On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 04:39:20PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> 
> > > At least IMHO.
> > > 
> > > ( What could _perhaps_ change the picture a bit IMO is drivers/staging/ i 
> > >   think - we could take a far more active role in certain types of 
> > >   projects that have been done out of tree typically, with no formal
> > >   promise for compatibility - or something like that. )
> > 
> > So if staging would have existed +one year ago, we should probably have 
> > included squashfs 3.3 at that time, and just have moved it to fs/ once 
> > the V4 layout was finished?
> 
> might have been a possibility - although there's a notable absence of any 
> filesystem drivers in the latest drivers/staging/ set.
> 
> Greg, is that just accidental (no one has submitted one yet) or is it some 
> sort of policy?

I was wanting to stick with drivers to start with, but I really have no
objection to adding filesystems, if they are self-contained, to the
drivers/staging/ directory.

I looked at adding squashfs, but at the time, it touched other portions
of the kernel which wouldn't have made it a good canidate for staging.
This was later resolved, and now that it is merged, it's a moot issue :)

So, if anyone wants to send me filesystems, I'll be glad to take them
into drivers/staging, as long as they are self-contained (novfs for
example would fit this category.)

thanks,

greg k-h