>
> And to Stephen, I would add that, from what I've been reading, XFS isn't
> necessarily considered "ready for prime time" (someone on the development
> team correct me me if my inference is incorrect). Having said that, I
> think it would probably be best to hve the development team be 100%
> confident that they've got everything worked out, before it is submitted
> to the kernel development team for inclusion in the "official" kernel.
>
I disagree, may new features which make it into the kernel are not 100%
ready for prime. As a matter of fact, the only way you can make
something
100% ready from prime is to get everyone to use it on the internet and
then
you will find all the bugs. I think reiserfs is a very good example. its
in the official kernel tree even though there are known corruptability
issues.
Redhat then puts it into rawhide to let us bleeding edgers kick its
tires
by building large file systems with it. Once a piece of software reaches
a pleateau of stability within the developers circles, you have to let
it out for the rest of us to use. As from what I read on the mailing
lists,
xfs has reached a stability pleateau on par with reiserfs and thus
should
be let into the kernel tree.
OK, off my soap box.
Steve.
|