Re: [Evms-devel] Re: Linux v2.5.42

Christoph Hellwig
2002-10-14T15:10:00Z

On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 12:18:52AM +0800, Michael Clark wrote:
> one you decides. At the end of the day it is just another 'driver'
> and I don't think it's fair to place a higher benchmark of quality
> on EVMS than all the other drivers in the kernel

If you followed lkml you'll see that I even explain authors of
very small drivers how to fit the kernel standards. The situation
with those is a little different as they are not a framework and
don't add new APIs. Thus it's only a correctness and style issues.

EVMS on the other hand is not only a lot of code but also a framework,
i.e. it folows certain design principles. And I fundamentally
disagree with some of those.

> Some of us have large arrays and SANs where the absence a volume
> manager is a big thing.

Not having EVMS ~= not having a volume manager. I don't want
to have to manage my storage farms without a volume manager either,
but that doesn't have to mean that I like the EVMS design.