From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030293AbWFIQ1S (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jun 2006 12:27:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030292AbWFIQ1R (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jun 2006 12:27:17 -0400 Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:14223 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030289AbWFIQ1Q (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jun 2006 12:27:16 -0400 Message-ID: <4489A15E.5020904@garzik.org> Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 12:27:10 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (X11/20060501) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mike Snitzer CC: Alex Tomas , Christoph Hellwig , Mingming Cao , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ext2-devel , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3 References: <1149816055.4066.60.camel@dyn9047017069.beaverton.ibm.com> <20060609091327.GA3679@infradead.org> <44898476.80401@garzik.org> <4489874C.1020108@garzik.org> <44899113.3070509@garzik.org> <170fa0d20606090921x71719ad3m7f9387ba15413b8f@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <170fa0d20606090921x71719ad3m7f9387ba15413b8f@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -4.2 (----) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 3.1.1 on srv5.dvmed.net summary: Content analysis details: (-4.2 points, 5.0 required) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Mike Snitzer wrote: > Developers never _want_ to branch (maintenance-hell), the question > becomes: do the risks associated with ext3-with-extents' backword > incompatibility _really_ justify the branch? It's also a question of... why keep adding modernizing features to ext3, thus keeping it on life support, but just barely? If we are going to modernize the _main Linux filesystem_, let's not do it in a way that is slow, and ties our hands. Jeff