> On Wed, 2002-03-27 at 13:32, Florin Andrei wrote:
> I don't think it's been done before and possibly not a good precendent
> to set, but perhaps SGI could set up a form (or volunteer someone to
> collect e-mail messages, or use an on-line petition service) to get a
> letter to Linus saying "We the undersigned all think XFS rocks and is
> way stable enough to get included in the 2.5 tree today and in the 2.4
> tree some months ago".
>
> Or if it would look like undue commercial pressure if SGI did it, I
> could whack up a form to do it...
>
> Opinions, comments, flames anyone?
Well, since you asked... ;-)
Seriously, though -- first and foremost, I'm an XFS "user", and most
certainly am not competent to comment in-depth on kernel issues, but I'd
always been somewhat under the impression that ACLs brought up security
issues that had yet to be dealt with, and that that was a large portion of
the reason for Linus' reluctance to include it. Is this true? If so, how
has it been addressed? Or am I merely misguided?
$.02,
-Ken
|