public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: William Heimbigner <icxcnika@mar.tar.cc>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: Eric Hopper <hopper@omnifarious.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Question about Reiser4
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 05:57:53 +0000 (GMT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0704230555020.25153@server.thyself> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <462C4858.3050006@redhat.com>

> William Heimbigner wrote:
>> >  Eric Hopper wrote:
>> > >   I know that this whole effort has been put in disarray by the
>> > >   prosecution of Hans Reiser, but I'm curious as to its status. 
>> > 
>> >  It was in disarray well before.  Many of the reiser4 features,
>> >  like filesystem plugins, make more technical sense in the Linux
>> >  VFS, but made more business sense for Namesys as a reiserfs 4
>> >  thing.  That lead to a stalemate.
>> >
>>  Shouldn't it be a matter of stability though? 
>
> A lot of other things matter.  Things like a willingness to
> maintain the code after it gets merged, or at least turning
> the code into something the community is willing to maintain
> if the original developers stop maintaining it.
>
>>  Benchmarks suggest that reiser4 is a good file system; reiser4 is the
>>  successor to the already-accepted reiserfs; we've got experimental ext4
>>  support but no reiser4 support, etc.
>
> Namesys kind of abandoned reiserfs after work on reiser4
> started.  Taking in a new code base on such a track record
> is not a good idea when the code is not in a shape where
> the community wants to maintain it.
>
>>  I don't see why something like plugins should matter. If it works enough
>>  to be marked as experimental, why shouldn't reiser4 support be included?
>>  It's a pain for me personally to have to patch any kernel with reiser4
>>  support so I can use the reiser4 fs.
>
> You basically have three options:
>
> 1) keep patching every time you upgrade the kernel
>
> 2) use another filesystem
>
> 3) become the new reiser4 maintainer and turn the code
>    into something that Linus is willing to accept

I suppose. I have a feeling there's an underlying issue behind "code 
standards" (and even then, I think that code standards is ultimately an 
excuse for not integrating reiser4 support into the kernel, but that's 
just my opinion). However, is the code really in such a shape that the 
community doesn't want to maintain it? Obviously there's a significant 
number of people interested in reiser4 - if there weren't, questions like 
this wouldn't keep getting asked.

William Heimbigner
icxcnika@mar.tar.cc

  reply	other threads:[~2007-04-23  5:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-04-23  2:00 Question about Reiser4 Eric Hopper
2007-04-23  2:31 ` Lee Revell
2007-04-23  3:56 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-23  3:56   ` William Heimbigner
2007-04-23  5:47     ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-23  5:57       ` William Heimbigner [this message]
2007-04-23  6:07         ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-23  6:14           ` William Heimbigner
2007-04-23  6:20             ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-23  6:42               ` William Heimbigner
2007-04-23  8:04                 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-23 11:31                   ` l.genoni
2007-04-23 13:52                   ` Eric Hopper
2007-04-23 17:40                     ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-23 18:36                       ` Miguel Ojeda
2007-04-23 19:05                       ` Andi Kleen
2007-04-23 22:56                     ` Theodore Tso
2007-04-23 23:53                       ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-04-24  0:14                         ` Neil Brown
2007-04-24  0:21                           ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-04-24 13:30                             ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-04-24  0:19                         ` Theodore Tso
2007-04-24  0:31                           ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-04-24  1:17                             ` Theodore Tso
2007-04-24 11:15                               ` Denis Vlasenko
2007-04-25  6:39                           ` Eric M. Hopper
2007-04-25 14:45                             ` lkml777
2007-04-23  6:14         ` Jeff Chua
     [not found] <20070423111939.c876c9cc.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
2007-04-24 14:43 ` Edward Shishkin
2007-04-24 19:39   ` Andi Kleen
2007-04-25 14:35     ` Edward Shishkin
2007-04-25 14:49       ` Jeff Chua
2007-04-25 15:06         ` lkml777
2007-04-25 15:50           ` Jeff Chua
2007-04-26  5:05             ` lkml777
2007-04-26  6:49               ` Jeff Chua
2007-04-26  5:09         ` lkml777
2007-04-26  6:48           ` Jeff Chua
2007-04-26  8:18             ` Jeff Chua
2007-04-27  7:16               ` lkml777
2007-04-26  0:44       ` lkml777
2007-04-25  0:12   ` lkml777
2007-04-25  6:26     ` Eric M. Hopper
2007-04-25 15:03     ` Edward Shishkin
2007-04-26  7:47     ` lkml777
2007-04-26  7:54     ` lkml777
2007-05-02  2:39   ` lkml777
2007-05-02  4:53   ` lkml777

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.64.0704230555020.25153@server.thyself \
    --to=icxcnika@mar.tar.cc \
    --cc=hopper@omnifarious.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=riel@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox