Re: Ideas for btrfs-convert fix(or rework)

[Austin S Hemmelgarn <ahferroin7@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1527 bytes --]

On 2015-11-12 05:23, Vytautas D wrote:
> [ resending as it didnt get through. ]
>
> I got different opinion. btrfs-convert is something that
> brought me to btrfs. While there are other bugs to fix, someone
> dedicating time to fix btrfs-convert is of high interest to me.
> Sending right message to community, might make some rolling distros to
> trust it and experiment with it.
While I can kind of understand this, what has been said about it being 
something you run exactly once per-system per-filesystem is not untrue 
for almost all users.  It has almost no value for people setting up new 
systems (because they can just use BTRFS directly), and I personally see 
very limited value for the two biggest rolling-release distros that I 
know of (Arch and Gentoo), because the very fact that you installed a 
system with either one means that you are fully capable of backing up 
your data, and reprovisioning the system using BTRFS instead of whatever 
filesystem you are already using (and that will _always_ be safer than 
in-place conversion).  I also see little value for non rolling-release 
systems other than Ubuntu (and possibly Mint, I don't know if they have 
reliably working in-place release upgrades or not) because system 
upgrades with those are usually full re-installs (and by the time that 
btrfs-convert has been around long enough that they consider it safe to 
package, BTRFS will be a lot more prevalent and will likely have been 
the default FS for them for a long time).


[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 3019 bytes --]