From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757664AbZBXOQP (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Feb 2009 09:16:15 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756123AbZBXOP6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Feb 2009 09:15:58 -0500 Received: from thunk.org ([69.25.196.29]:39595 "EHLO thunker.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756098AbZBXOP5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Feb 2009 09:15:57 -0500 Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 09:15:48 -0500 From: Theodore Tso To: Tomas M Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: New filesystem for Linux kernel Message-ID: <20090224141548.GB5482@mit.edu> Mail-Followup-To: Theodore Tso , Tomas M , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <7558.1235374266@jrobl> <7769.1235374482@jrobl> <49A268A7.1010708@slax.org> <49A26ACC.90804@slax.org> <49A3AC14.2050107@slax.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <49A3AC14.2050107@slax.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tytso@mit.edu X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on thunker.thunk.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 09:13:08AM +0100, Tomas M wrote: > An overview of aufs2 has been submitted to this list. > I noticed zero response at all. Nobody cares? > > I suggest to remove unionfs from Andrew's -mm tree and replace it by aufs2! > Tell me why this should not happen... Um, you need to tell us why aufs2 is better than Unionfs. The burden of proof rests on your shoulders. The code which is displacing existing code needs to give a justification about why it is better than the code which is displacing, not the other way around. > I write this in the hope that a debate will start... As a debate judge might say, you haven't even made your prima facie case yet. - Ted