From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Lang Subject: Re: [FYI] tux3: Core changes Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 15:27:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <67294911-1776-46b8-916d-0e5642a38725@phunq.net> <20150526070910.GA3307@quack.suse.cz> <20150526090058.GA8024@quack.suse.cz> <5564D60E.6000306@phunq.net> <20150527084138.GD2590@quack.suse.cz> <87a8vtdqfz.fsf@mail.parknet.co.jp> <20150623161247.GP2427@quack.suse.cz> <87k2ueepd6.fsf@mail.parknet.co.jp> <20150709160528.GK2900@quack.suse.cz> <874mklaqbn.fsf@mail.parknet.co.jp> <1981a91e-30a9-43ce-9a05-14aa777e46a5@phunq.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Rik van Riel , Jan Kara , tux3@tux3.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, OGAWA Hirofumi To: Daniel Phillips Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: tux3-bounces@phunq.net Sender: "Tux3" List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Fri, 31 Jul 2015, Daniel Phillips wrote: > On Friday, July 31, 2015 11:29:51 AM PDT, David Lang wrote: >> We, the Linux Community have less tolerance for losing people's data and >> preventing them from operating than we used to when it was all tinkerer's >> personal data and secondary systems. >> >> So rather than pushing optimizations out to everyone and seeing what >> breaks, we now do more testing and checking for failures before pushing >> things out. > > By the way, I am curious about whose data you think will get lost > as a result of pushing out Tux3 with a possible theoretical bug > in a wildly improbable scenario that has not actually been > described with sufficient specificity to falsify, let alone > demonstrated. you weren't asking about any particular feature of Tux, you were asking if we were still willing to push out stuff that breaks for users and fix it later. Especially for filesystems that can loose the data of whoever is using it, the answer seems to be a clear no. there may be bugs in what's pushed out that we don't know about. But we don't push out potential data corruption bugs that we do know about (or think we do) so if you think this should be pushed out with this known corner case that's not handled properly, you have to convince people that it's _so_ improbable that they shouldn't care about it. David Lang