Re: Listmaster request: Do not blacklist rms@gnu.org

[James Blackwell <jblack@linuxguru.net>]

In lists.linux.kernel.development, you wrote:
> James Blackwell wrote:
> 
>>Do you think Hans Reiser
>>felt like you were doing the right thing when he had to change his
>>timeline on Reiserfs so as to avoid competing with your project as long
>>as possible? 
>>
>>  
>>
> I did not change my timeline. Though I was tempted to move version 
> control up in the priority queue, it nonetheless will remain low until 
> the right developer comes along, or other things that also need doing 
> are moved out of that queue.

I'm very sorry. I could have sworn you had said something along the
lines of 'Some day I want to put version control into reiser, which
could technically be considered a competitor to bitkeeper. I have a lot
of other things to do with reiserfs as well so I'll do those first'. But
when I went back through the list, I couldn't find it. 

The closest to that I could find was the following: 

> reiser4 will not contain version control.  I don't know when version
> control will go into ReiserFS.  I do think it should go in eventually
> though, as it makes distributed filesystems more effective if there is
> version control functionality.  We would do something that in no way
> resembled BK.  We would do it after implementing the core distributed
> tree algorithms.  Probably not going to happen in less than 3-5 years.
> ...
> There are so many features missing from ReiserFS, and I am not really
> picky about what order they go in.....  With Reiser4 we finally have

I must have gotten the issues involved with reiserfs confused with
another project.

Again, I'm sorry I got your position wrong.

-- 
GnuPG fingerprint AAE4 8C76 58DA 5902 761D  247A 8A55 DA73 0635 7400
James Blackwell  --  Director http://www.linuxguru.net