From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 31 16:30:05 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01E0716A40D for ; Sat, 31 Mar 2007 16:30:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-fs@m.gmane.org) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BEA313C4B0 for ; Sat, 31 Mar 2007 16:30:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-fs@m.gmane.org) Received: from root by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1HXgSo-0005a4-Ec for freebsd-fs@freebsd.org; Sat, 31 Mar 2007 18:30:02 +0200 Received: from www.creo.hu ([217.113.62.14]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 31 Mar 2007 18:30:02 +0200 Received: from csaba-ml by www.creo.hu with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 31 Mar 2007 18:30:02 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org From: Csaba Henk Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 13:49:43 +0000 (UTC) Lines: 33 Message-ID: References: <4746DA006C148BC0FF1241C6@ganymede.hub.org> <45CCECCB7ECB612F504211F3@ganymede.hub.org> X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: www.creo.hu User-Agent: slrn/0.9.8.1 (FreeBSD) Sender: news Subject: Re: TDFS ... or other distributed file system technologies for FreeBSD? X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2007 16:30:05 -0000 On 2007-03-27, Ivan Voras wrote: > Since FUSE is (L)GPL'ed, chances of getting it into base are slim. Then > there's the question of who would be responsible for it, since the > developer of the FUSE BSD module was also a SoC student and I don't know > if he's interested in maintaining it that way - I'll go ask him. Yep, Ivan asked me so its time for me to chime in. (Thanks for waking me up from my sleeping beauty state.) I think fuse4bsd could and should included into FreeBSD. Why is it not yet there? Those FBSD commiters I talked with gave a positive feedback so the reason is not that anyone had opposed such an addition. The reason is the combination of my perfectionalism and business/laziness. I wanted to achieve certain milestones before asking for having it merged in. I didn't achieve them last year. Now it's time to change strategy. While certain features are missing (and will be for a while), the existing code works well and is not yet bitrotten. So while I might whine to myself about those missing features, the average FUSE based filesystem will run happily with it and I think the average FreeBSD user Joe could be happy with what she gets. To add, much more happier with what is availabe as sysutils/fusefs-kmod from the ports tree -- current fuse4bsd is pretty much superior than version 0.3.0 (the one in ports). So, whom to pester about getting fuse4bsd merged?... Csaba