From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: VFS tree for 3.17?
Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2014 08:03:21 -0700
Message-ID: <20140726150321.GA9230@infradead.org>
References: <20140716114136.GA25237@infradead.org>
 <20140722162455.GA15053@infradead.org>
 <20140724153057.GA1584@infradead.org>
 <CAJfpeguYamZTcdUCZ6+7E=MxQnapF5xE+biOTnhdTQ_V7J1yZw@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	Linux-Fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
	linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAJfpeguYamZTcdUCZ6+7E=MxQnapF5xE+biOTnhdTQ_V7J1yZw@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 06:35:24PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> overlayfs?  I think it's mature enough, but I thought that a year ago,
> and there's been a format change since then...  So how do people feel?

Even if I had reviewed it recently I wouldn't pull in something that
large without wainting for Al to reappear.