From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Aug 20 07:51:58 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 364A816A41F; Sat, 20 Aug 2005 07:51:58 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jd@ugcs.caltech.edu) Received: from vomit.ugcs.caltech.edu (vomit.ugcs.caltech.edu [131.215.176.103]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3CE743D46; Sat, 20 Aug 2005 07:51:55 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jd@ugcs.caltech.edu) Received: by vomit.ugcs.caltech.edu (Postfix, from userid 3640) id 77125E816; Sat, 20 Aug 2005 00:51:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by vomit.ugcs.caltech.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CE80E815; Sat, 20 Aug 2005 00:51:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 00:51:55 -0700 (PDT) From: Jon Dama To: Craig Rodrigues In-Reply-To: <20050819143741.GA11399@crodrigues.org> Message-ID: References: <20050819015327.GA7627@crodrigues.org> <86fyt6gyds.fsf@xps.des.no> <20050819120309.GA10568@crodrigues.org> <86vf22dswg.fsf@xps.des.no> <4305D7FA.2070900@portaone.com> <20050819143741.GA11399@crodrigues.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: XFS for FreeBSD, new snapshot available 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, 20 Aug 2005 07:51:58 -0000 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. > > Thanks. > > -- > Craig Rodrigues > rodrigc@crodrigues.org > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >