From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264331AbTLBTzJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Dec 2003 14:55:09 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264332AbTLBTzJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Dec 2003 14:55:09 -0500 Received: from mail3.ithnet.com ([217.64.64.7]:50577 "HELO heather-ng.ithnet.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S264331AbTLBTzE (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Dec 2003 14:55:04 -0500 X-Sender-Authentication: net64 Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 20:55:02 +0100 From: Stephan von Krawczynski To: Marcelo Tosatti Cc: nathans@sgi.com, lm@work.bitmover.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: XFS for 2.4 Message-Id: <20031202205502.474755f3.skraw@ithnet.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20031202002347.GD621@frodo> Organization: ith Kommunikationstechnik GmbH X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.7 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2 Dec 2003 09:22:48 -0200 (BRST) Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > [...] > A development tree is much different from a stable tree. You cant just > simply backport generic VFS changes just because everybody agreed with > them on the development tree. > > My whole point is "2.6 is almost out of the door and its so much better". > Its much faster, much cleaner. Even if I am a bit off-topic here, please reconsider your last sentence. Don't make people think that 2.6 is in a widely useable state right now. Just take a look at the history of 2.4. Don't forget 2.4 can be used in boxes beyond 4 GB only right _now_ (2.4.23), all previous versions fall completely apart on i386 platform. 2.4 is right now nice, useable and pretty stable - and 2.6 has not even begun to see the real-and-ugly world yet. There will for sure be a lot of interesting test cases during the next months for 2.6, but there are quite an amount of people that need a real stable environment - and that's why they will have to use 2.4 for at least one year from now on. This is no vote for or against XFS-inclusion, I don't know the thing at all. I only want to state: developer environment is pretty different from the real world, so don't dump 2.4 too early please. Regards, Stephan