Technical Spec, better upgrade/rollback control

[Josh Boyer]

On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 8:52 AM, Matthias Clasen <mclasen at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-02-21 at 08:40 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
>
>>
>> I discussed btrfs with some of our FS experts at DevConf a couple
>> weeks ago, and then further via email after.  I'm not convinced it's
>> ready to be the default FS for any product in Fedora yet.  I'm hoping
>> that I can get some/one of these experts to attend Flock this year and
>> give a talk on btrfs.  Where it's at, what it needs to be the default
>> fs, etc.  We may wind up with a feature-reduced btrfs option in the
>> not too distant future being viable (e.g. no multi-device spanning, no
>> RAID).
>
> We may want to reword the 'file system' section I just put in the tech
> spec, then.

I'll look it over soon.  I've been trying to play catch up on kernel
bugs this week.

>> I realize btrfs is something people are really excited about and
>> really want, but I'm not willing to let hype or "mostly" working
>> features swing our decision.  People have been living without
>> fs-rollback for years, and I think they can wait a bit longer.  The
>> last thing we need is to get bad hype because people start losing
>> their data if we force the issue.
>
> Tbh, from where I stand, people were excited about btrfs a few years
> ago, but the excitement has wanted. You can hold your breath only for so
> long. Time to either push it over the hump this year, or give up and
> move on. Isn't suse using btrfs by default now ?

SLES or OpenSUSE?  For SLES, I think they have it as an option, but in
a very reduced mode as I described above.  I think it's an option in
OpenSUSE 13.x, but it isn't the default because there were things they
didn't think were production ready.  So they basically match Fedora in
terms of defaults.  I do think they promote and work on snapper and
btrfs more than we do though.

josh