From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 16 May 2001 05:22:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 16 May 2001 05:22:08 -0400 Received: from hermes.sistina.com ([208.210.145.141]:43526 "HELO sistina.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Wed, 16 May 2001 05:21:54 -0400 Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 11:19:03 +0000 From: "Heinz J. Mauelshagen" To: linux-lvm@sistina.com Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] LVM 1.0 release decision Message-ID: <20010516111903.E11984@sistina.com> Reply-To: Mauelshagen@sistina.com In-Reply-To: <3AFC42EB.2910DAAE@wrkhors.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: ; from riel@conectiva.com.br on Sun, May 13, 2001 at 08:48:19PM -0300 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 08:48:19PM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Fri, 11 May 2001, Steven Lembark wrote: > > > for my part running the system i'd rather have the "production" > > LVM and kernel releases in sync and not have to worry about it. > > if i need a beta/inter-version release then i'll deal with the > > extra issues. > > Agreed. If the in-kernel LVM cannot be trusted, I really > don't see why Sistina would ever want to associate its name > with something broken? Rik, that's not an issue at all and sorry, it doesn't help either! With the help of community contributors we *do* provide the most recent code with as few bugs as possible at www.sistina.com/lvm as we always did. Everybody could and can get it from there and established LVM users continue to do it this way. OTOH we need a lot of time now to get smaller patches into vanilla. Therefore we kindly asked for community oppinions to help the situation. Unless a bigger LVM patch to vanilla is accepted, we need to spend a lot of work on providing those smaller chunks of patches which distracts us a lot from other work. Don't tell me that this is all our fault; this wouldn't *help* to fasten the process either! A little trust to accept a bigger patch *and* to sort pending issues out with the help of the community afterwards is a valid approach IMO to get faster to the point of an updated vanilla LVM driver than with the tiny patches approach. Linus, Alan et al.: maybe you could think about it again and accept one larger LVM patch. Thanks. > > I think it would be better for everyone (users, Sistina's > corporate image and Linux) to get something stable into the > kernel before sending out the press release ;) > > (after all, a version number change is just a one-liner patch > away ;)) > > regards, > > Rik > -- > Virtual memory is like a game you can't win; > However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose... > > http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/ > > Send all your spam to aardvark@nl.linux.org (spam digging piggy) > > _______________________________________________ > linux-lvm mailing list > linux-lvm@sistina.com > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm -- Regards, Heinz -- The LVM Guy -- *** Software bugs are stupid. Nevertheless it needs not so stupid people to solve them *** =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Heinz Mauelshagen Sistina Software Inc. Senior Consultant/Developer Am Sonnenhang 11 56242 Marienrachdorf Germany Mauelshagen@Sistina.com +49 2626 141200 FAX 924446 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-