From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263310AbTLJIqC (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Dec 2003 03:46:02 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263464AbTLJIqC (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Dec 2003 03:46:02 -0500 Received: from ns.virtualhost.dk ([195.184.98.160]:57260 "EHLO virtualhost.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263310AbTLJIqA (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Dec 2003 03:46:00 -0500 Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 09:45:46 +0100 From: Jens Axboe To: Joe Thornber Cc: Paul Jakma , Marcelo Tosatti , Linux Mailing List Subject: Re: Device-mapper submission for 2.4 Message-ID: <20031210084546.GG3988@suse.de> References: <20031209134551.GG472@reti> <20031209143412.GI472@reti> <20031209222624.GA6591@reti> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031209222624.GA6591@reti> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 09 2003, Joe Thornber wrote: > On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 09:07:49PM +0000, Paul Jakma wrote: > > On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Joe Thornber wrote: > > Would this be of any aid to 2.4 users to transition to DM, so that > > they can then easily test 2.6 and boot back to 2.4 if needs be? > > > > If so, my vote would be for it to be included in 2.4. > > yes Seems to me, it's the lvm2 teams responsibility to provide easy transition to 2.6 from 2.4. Merging dm in 2.4 right now looks like a step in the wrong direction. Arguments akin to "But XFS got merged, surely we can to" don't hold up one bit. Should be obvious why. -- Jens Axboe