From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261347AbVFUMpv (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jun 2005 08:45:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261323AbVFUMoL (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jun 2005 08:44:11 -0400 Received: from clock-tower.bc.nu ([81.2.110.250]:6564 "EHLO lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261315AbVFUMmX (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jun 2005 08:42:23 -0400 Subject: Re: -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status (fuse) From: Alan Cox To: Miklos Szeredi Cc: akpm@osdl.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: References: <20050620235458.5b437274.akpm@osdl.org> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <1119357566.3325.127.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 (1.4.6-2) Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 13:39:28 +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Maw, 2005-06-21 at 11:22, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > So I welcome constructive discussion. However bear in mind, that I > definitely don't want to disable unprivileged mounts. For me that is > _the_ most important feature of FUSE. If the choice was "merge FUSE without unpriv mounts for now" or "discard fuse completely" which is preferable. It seems to me (just IMHO) that it would be better to merge FUSE without that feature and then spend the time getting that feature right _in parallel_ with people using, breaking and reviewing FUSE a lot more.