On 10/10/2007, <b class="gmail_sendername">Tom spot Callaway</b> <<a href="mailto:tcallawa@redhat.com">tcallawa@redhat.com</a>> wrote:<div><span class="gmail_quote"></span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>On Wed, 2007-10-10 at 23:02 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:<br>> /me will keep away from this thread now -- this won't lead to anything<br>> anyway; I'll tag it in the growing categories "Fedora knows better
<br>> then<br>> me want I want" and "why Fedora never will become a true community<br>> distribution"<br><br>DaveJ doesn't want the bugreports. Are you volunteering to take them?</blockquote><div>
<br>These aren't bug reports.<br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">There are two ntfs implementations. One is old, crufted, and poorly
<br>maintained. </blockquote><div><br>Sorry but that is bullshit. Old and crufted aren't very good technical arguments and poorly maintained is simply untrue. If this boils down to "It doesn't have write support, bwaaaaaaaah" then "poorly maintained" isn't much of one either. The reason there have been so few git commits is because it works fine in the state that its in and as I explained, the core developer is focused mainly on the new driver which, license debates aside, will be released in about a year.
<br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">The other one is actively maintained, with lots of new<br>releases, bugfixes, and performance improvements.
</blockquote><div><br>No argument here.<br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Which one should Fedora put forward for users, who don't know better?
</blockquote><div><br>No, they run ShuttleworthLinux. <br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Both?</blockquote><div><br>
Yes, remember choice? mount.ntfs for kernel driver, mount.ntfs-3g for userspace<br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Dave asked me for my opinion, and I said that we shouldn't ship<br>something that's not recommended by one of its authors, and has no real<br>maintenance upstream:<br><br><a href="http://ntfs-3g.org/about.html">http://ntfs-3g.org/about.html
</a></blockquote><div><br>You're taking that from Szaka's mouth who spat the dummy and went off and created ntfs-3g when he could have merged it with ntfsprogs. It actually has nothing to do with the kernel driver.
<br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">IMHO, this the same reason we don't enable every possible module in the<br>
kernel. </blockquote><div><br>No, we don't enable every module because some conflict with each other,
some are experimental, and some simply don't work (cough bcm43xx cough) </div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Feel free to plead your case to Dave Jones if you'd like.
</blockquote><div><br>Since you're the one who made the decision, it really should be you who is answering the critics. I don't think "I made the decision, now go talk to Dave" is aligned with "DaveJ doesn't want the bugreports."
<br><br>Cheers<br>Chris<br></div></div><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><a href="http://www.chruz.com">http://www.chruz.com</a>