"Home" of reiser4?

"Home" of reiser4?

[Markus]

Hello Edward, Glenn, Viji, Sandro and all other activists,

now, that the patches are gone from 
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/edward/reiser4/,
is http://sourceforge.net/projects/reiser4/ now the "official" home
for further reiser4 development?

To which degree is this platform intended to be used {documentation,
discussions, versioned sources, bug tracking}?

Are older patchsets {eg. those still on 
http://130.83.2.34/pub/linux/mirrors/misc/old/reiserfs/reiser4-for-2.6
and
http://ftp.sunet.se/pub/Linux/kernels/people/edward/reiser4/reiser4-for-2.6/}
intended to be kept on Sourceforge as well?

Any ideas about authorisation {who may write what}?


Best regards,

   Markus

Re: "Home" of reiser4?

[Edward Shishkin]

On 05/21/2012 06:47 PM, Markus wrote:
> Hello Edward, Glenn, Viji, Sandro and all other activists,
>

Hello.

> now, that the patches are gone from
> http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/edward/reiser4/,
> is http://sourceforge.net/projects/reiser4/ now the "official" home
> for further reiser4 development?

Yes.

>
> To which degree is this platform intended to be used {documentation,
> discussions, versioned sources, bug tracking}?

Patches and (maybe) SCM.

I don't see a need to track bugs of current stuff:
any problems are resolved to the old 2-3 bugs that
I am aware of..

>
> Are older patchsets {eg. those still on
> http://130.83.2.34/pub/linux/mirrors/misc/old/reiserfs/reiser4-for-2.6
> and
> http://ftp.sunet.se/pub/Linux/kernels/people/edward/reiser4/reiser4-for-2.6/}
> intended to be kept on Sourceforge as well?

Good idea..

>
> Any ideas about authorisation {who may write what}?

Me. And other active reiser4 developers (if any)..

Thanks,
Edward.

Re: "Home" of reiser4?

[Edward Shishkin]

On 05/21/2012 07:15 PM, Edward Shishkin wrote:
> On 05/21/2012 06:47 PM, Markus wrote:
>> Hello Edward, Glenn, Viji, Sandro and all other activists,
>>
>
> Hello.
>
>> now, that the patches are gone from
>> http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/edward/reiser4/,
>> is http://sourceforge.net/projects/reiser4/ now the "official" home
>> for further reiser4 development?
>
> Yes.
>
>>
>> To which degree is this platform intended to be used {documentation,
>> discussions,


Developers documentation has been performed as a set
of comments in reiser4 source code.

Some info ("getting started", etc.) can be found here:
https://reiser4.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Main_Page

And all discussions are going here (in the mailing list).

Thanks,
Edward.


  versioned sources, bug tracking}?
>
> Patches and (maybe) SCM.
>
> I don't see a need to track bugs of current stuff:
> any problems are resolved to the old 2-3 bugs that
> I am aware of..
>
>>
>> Are older patchsets {eg. those still on
>> http://130.83.2.34/pub/linux/mirrors/misc/old/reiserfs/reiser4-for-2.6
>> and
>> http://ftp.sunet.se/pub/Linux/kernels/people/edward/reiser4/reiser4-for-2.6/}
>>
>> intended to be kept on Sourceforge as well?
>
> Good idea..
>
>>
>> Any ideas about authorisation {who may write what}?
>
> Me. And other active reiser4 developers (if any)..
>
> Thanks,
> Edward.

Re: "Home" of reiser4?

[Markus]

Hi Edward,

thanks for these explanations.  They make already a lot of things
much clearer: discussions, packaging {"patches"} and authentication
seem obvious.


Edward Shishkin writes:
 > On 05/21/2012 07:15 PM, Edward Shishkin wrote:
 > > On 05/21/2012 06:47 PM, Markus wrote:
 > >> Hello Edward, Glenn, Viji, Sandro and all other activists,
 > >>
...
 > >>
 > >> To which degree is this platform intended to be used {documentation,
 > >> discussions,
 > 
 > 
 > Developers documentation has been performed as a set
 > of comments in reiser4 source code.
 > 
 > Some info ("getting started", etc.) can be found here:
 > https://reiser4.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Main_Page
 > 
The problem with the wikis presently is that there are too many with a
lot of outdated content.  
I think, it would be an important move to declare one of them as
"authentic" with references to and some statements about the others. 


 > 
 >   versioned sources, bug tracking}?
 > >
 > > Patches and (maybe) SCM.
 > >
 > > I don't see a need to track bugs of current stuff:
 > > any problems are resolved to the old 2-3 bugs that
 > > I am aware of..
 > >
Hmm.  Seen from outside it's doesn't look as easy as for you.
For [probably not only] me, it's very difficult to judge, if a
problem, I have, has already been reported by somebody else, when I
have to find this out along the mailing list.
Also questions like 
  - are there additional fixes beyond the official patches, which went
    into the various OpenSuse and Fedora packages
  - what's the status of the grsecurity problem
, ... are much easier to track, if one can read them focused by topic.

Or if I want to get an idea about maturity before jumping into a use
of reiser4 for a certain purpose, it would be much more transparent
for me to look at open tickets and whether they are expected to be
relevant at all for my potential use. 

You see, I would be lucky if we could make use of a bugtracking
facility.   


 > >>
...
 > 


My 2 cents and some more thanks,

   Markus