From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
Subject: Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 15:35:41 -0400
Message-ID: <4489CD8D.5060809@garzik.org>
References: <1149816055.4066.60.camel@dyn9047017069.beaverton.ibm.com>	<4488E1A4.20305@garzik.org>	<20060609083523.GQ5964@schatzie.adilger.int>	<44898EE3.6080903@garzik.org> <448992EB.5070405@garzik.org>	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0606090836160.5498@g5.osdl.org>	<m33beecntr.fsf@bzzz.home.net>	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0606090913390.5498@g5.osdl.org>	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0606090933130.5498@g5.osdl.org>	<20060609181020.GB5964@schatzie.adilger.int>	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0606091114270.5498@g5.osdl.org>	<m31wty9o77.fsf@bzzz.home.net>	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0606091137340.5498@g5.osdl.org>	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0606091347590.5541@turbotaz.ourhouse>	<1149880865.22124.70.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<m3irna6sja.fsf@bzzz.home.net> <4489CB42.6020709@garzik.org> <m3wtbq5dgw.fsf@bzzz.home.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Chase Venters <chase.venters@clientec.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
	Andreas Dilger <adilger@clusterfs.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	ext2-devel <ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cmm@us.ibm.com,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Return-path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:61340 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net")
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030440AbWFITfu (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 9 Jun 2006 15:35:50 -0400
To: Alex Tomas <alex@clusterfs.com>
In-Reply-To: <m3wtbq5dgw.fsf@bzzz.home.net>
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org

Alex Tomas wrote:
>>>>>> Jeff Garzik (JG) writes:
> 
>  JG> Irrelevant.  That's a development-only situation.  It will be enabled
>  JG> by default eventually, and should be considered in that light.
> 
> that's your point of view. mine is that this option (and code)
> to be used only when needed. 

Regardless of any use "when needed," the code is in the codebase, and is 
thus the "if (metadata_v2) ... else ..." maintenance burden that has 
been discussed.

	Jeff