From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Masover <ninja@slaphack.com>
Subject: Re: Another article abour Reiser4 on linux.com
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2006 10:55:16 -0400
Message-ID: <44D4B154.6010005@slaphack.com>
References: <87bqqzbaug.fsf@baldur.nicundtas.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <reiserfs-list-return-29489-reiserfs=m.gmane.org@namesys.com>
list-help: <mailto:reiserfs-list-help@namesys.com>
list-unsubscribe: <mailto:reiserfs-list-unsubscribe@namesys.com>
list-post: <mailto:reiserfs-list@namesys.com>
Errors-To: flx@namesys.com
In-Reply-To: <87bqqzbaug.fsf@baldur.nicundtas.de>
List-Id: <reiserfs-devel.vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
To: Tassilo Horn <heimdall@uni-koblenz.de>
Cc: reiserfs-list@namesys.com

Tassilo Horn wrote:

> [1] http://www.linux.com/article.pl?sid=06/07/31/1548201

 From the article:

"To complicate matters, Reiser4's approach lands the filesystem in the 
middle of a longstanding convention of avoiding plugins in the kernel, 
mainly to avoid architectural complications, but also to discourage 
proprietary drivers that circumvent the kernel's release under the GNU 
General Public License."

We should really find something better to call them than "plugins", or 
we should come up with a standard copy'n'paste statement to refute this.