Thanks for the reply Justin, but that doesn't answer my two concerns which I reposted earlier.  I don't believe the questions I asked were unreasonable for something we're making a distribution default, regardless of spin, and they shouldn't be hard questions to answer.  Everyone knows that if BTRFS was in production status the headlines would be everywhere, i.e.:  "After a Decade in Development BTRFS reaches Production Milestone" but that's not the case because we all know it isn't.  Not to mention the Redhat stance in all this. 

On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 3:00 PM Justin Forbes <jmforbes@linuxtx.org> wrote:
On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 5:17 PM Gerald B. Cox <gbcox@bzb.us> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 2:30 PM Chris Murphy <lists@colorremedies.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 2:53 PM Gerald B. Cox <gbcox@bzb.us> wrote:
>>
>> > Why would we be installing something by default that has widely known broken functionality?
>>
>> Because the default configuration we're using isn't broken and is
>> better than the alternatives being evaluated.
>
>
> That raises the question of why RHEL deprecated BTRFS and why Fedora now apparently believes that BTRFS is better than XFS?
>

Please note the Workstation SIG is not all of Fedora, this is not
being proposed for the server spin.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org