Re: Formal Reiser4 inclusion and todo list?

[Ralph Ulrich <eulenreich@gmx.de>]

Christian Stroetmann 2010-08-01 15:43:
>> I haven't looked at the code since several years. But as far as I
>> have followed the development, all of the patch sets since then
>> (April 2009) were only of cosmetical nature, or said with other
>> words, to keep it coping with changes at different positions, like
>> eg. VFS. And in a handful of blogs I got no additional/other
>> informations, despite that the maintainer is working at a company in
>> the field of another file system since the end of last year, so that
...
> We always had the impression that he, like a handful
> of other persons, was only here at reiserfs to mess up the R4
> development, to work and make politics against this project, and to
> disturb the developers and their businesses.

I would like to thank E. Shishkin for his efforts to keep Reiser4 
breathing. I never had the impression someone wants to disturb 
development....

>> , and also that the opinions are that the project is dead.

I see an amount of features went into btrfs. And the skills of former 
Reiser4 developers also. Also Shishkin did his expertise on btrfs. What 
never was discussed during efforts to get Reiser4 into mainline kernel 
development:

The potentials of a never coming Reiser5 regarding semantics.

- As one can see at Christian Stroetmanns sites he has done some 
thinking that direction.

- As one can see watching the Nepomuk development, semantic development 
is hard, unprecedented and therefore has a very slowly ongoing.

Development of an all purpose filesystem mixed with an all purpose 
semantic feature seems to be too big of a challange yet. 

Me, non developer, would faczinate a revived Reiser4 as a fuse-
filesystem for experimental storage ideas! Some sort of database? A 
Nepomuk storage backend? I wonder if some NoSql projects out there have 
reimplemented Reiser4 techniques?