default file system, was: Comparison to Workstation Technical Specification

[Josef Bacik]

On Feb 26, 2014 10:18 AM, "Jaroslav Reznik" <jreznik at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 9:25 AM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer at fedoraproject.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Yeah, agreed here. Everyone wants the latest shiniest thing, even if
that
> > thing isn't ready. I really don't want to wade through tons of bug
reports
> > for btrfs just because it has a lot of hype.
> >
> > Also, right now cloud is plain old ext4. Let's see if we can ship *all*
of
> > the filesystems! It'll be fun!
>
> Yep, a lot of fun - three different file systems for free different
products.
> And we are back to the question how much these products could differ -
with
> limited resources we have right now - at least short term. Who can answer
it
> - filesystem/kernel guys, if they are able and willing to support all
> potential filesystem, as David stated, it's possible in Anaconda but again
> the same question if the team would be able to maintain more filesystems
> support with high bar in terms of quality (even for example brtfs limited
> to bare minimum), QA... And it could be pretty confusing for users but
that's
> up to us/marketing to explain that products aim specific goal and it's for
> good (if we would be able to support it - then it's for good, if not...).
>
> Adding devel list to CC - I expect another topic Base should be involved
> too.
>
> And no, no elections for file system. It's really up to WGs and
coordination
> with the rest teams.
>

Just popping in here to say that btrfs is not ready to be default in Fedora
yet.  Optional is fine but not default.  Thanks,

Josef
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20140226/19302fa7/attachment.html>