XFS for FreeBSD, new snapshot available
jd at ugcs.caltech.edu
Sat Aug 20 07:51:58 GMT 2005
I'd just like to say,
I'm really glad to see this work going on.
On another note though (and I don't claim this applies in this case), the
gradual adoption of the practice by various developers to squirl away
changes to FreeBSD in their private repositories is responsible for a
substantial loss in quality in the subsequent releases.
I realize a less active -current is easier on developers--I ran
5.0-current throughout much of its life-- -current become down right
pedestrian most of the time.
Changes need more eyeballs + users at incremental stages than current
development practices seem to enable. Yes it is more work to make a
series of chuncked commits to -current but the reward is early detection
of mistakes, clear intermediate states to revert to and rethink, and
better feedback from the rest of the community.
I think -core needs to step-up and re-evaluate the perforce approach.
Is it really better?
On Fri, 19 Aug 2005, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 04:00:42PM +0300, Maxim Sobolev wrote:
> > >You'll get more feedback if the code is in the tree, and there is
> > >precedent for committing filessystems without write support.
> While I understand that this has been done for other filesystems,
> I am not going to put XFS into the FreeBSD tree until I feel
> that it is ready. The source code and patches are available
> for people to try, so just because something is not in the tree,
> it does not preclude interested developers and users from
> trying it out and providing feedback/patches.
> Craig Rodrigues
> rodrigc at crodrigues.org
> freebsd-current at freebsd.org mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
More information about the freebsd-fs