From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christian Stroetmann OntoLab Subject: Re: reiser4 inclusion? Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2009 11:13:35 +0200 Message-ID: <49F2D43F.90105@ontolab.com> References: <49EB1E3F.1020905@gmail.com> <542E227E-E31D-496C-93FB-19393133297F@MailNewsRSS.com> <200904250153.33258.volkerarmin@googlemail.com> <2E9381E6-A09A-4330-9A61-C4B7D7CE0E71@MailNewsRSS.com> <49F2CF9A.1060202@inn.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <49F2CF9A.1060202@inn.nl> Sender: reiserfs-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: Arend Freije , reiserfs-devel Dear Arend, > Jason Todd Slack-Moehrle wrote: > >> So I forked. OntoLab too. >> > Where is you fork, and where is the fork from OntoLab? The reiser4 > patches on http://www.ontolinux.com/technology/ontofs.htm are identical > to the patches from Eduard > 1. I declared that it is not really a fork in the normal sense. I would call it a further development. 2. I started mirroring the code to support the development of the filesystem and to give it a webpage, which others can count on. This was done before the code was put into kernel.org space. 3. I do repeat now again: We're running in circles since 2 or 3 years. I also said to this kind of questions in this thread, that we aren't at this point actually. That means, we still have not got an open source (developer) community conform answer by responsible persons. 4. I hold my code back until the actual maintainer declares what he really is doing, is gone, or I have build up an own infrastructure with a mailing-list and other needed items. The latter will be what is called a fork and follow the advice of the actual maintainer (quote: "Go away"). > Cheers, > > Arend Best regards Christian *<:o)