default file system, was: Comparison to Workstation Technical Specification

[Josef Bacik]

On Mar 3, 2014 7:34 AM, "Stephen Gallagher" <sgallagh at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 03/01/2014 06:38 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> >
> > On Mar 1, 2014, at 3:58 PM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl at thelounge.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Am 01.03.2014 22:55, schrieb poma:
> >>> On 27.02.2014 01:33, Josef Bacik wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Just popping in here to say that btrfs is not ready to be
> >>>> default in Fedora yet.  Optional is fine but not default.
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>>
> >>> This is actually a good news. Thanks.
> >>>
> >>> Now all we need is fair support in the installer. BTRFS as
> >>> alternative scheme: +1 "F-Server" +1 "F-Workstation"
> >>
> >> one of the BTRFS maintainers explains is is *not* ready and you
> >> start "we need" in context of BTRFS? strange logic
> >
> > Josef said it's not ready to be default. Poma suggested making it
> > available as an alternate to whatever the default is, which is
> > consistent with how Fedora has been for three releases. His
> > suggestion is still fewer permutations than the partition scheme
> > outcomes in Fedora 20; and is about the same or on par with Fedora
> > 18/19, but still one more than oldui.
> >
>
>
> One of the things that we have been seriously discussing here is that
> non-default options (particularly those known not to be "ready") do
> not need or deserve to be presented with the same prominence as other
> options.
>
> In my opinion, only the default layout should be provided prominently.
> Other choices (such as btrfs) should be available as part of the
> "custom" layout options. Users should be permitted to install it (and
> without annoying hoops), but they are not entitled to us developing a
> "best effort default of a technology we aren't sure they should be
> using", which is essentially what the "btrfs" drop-down in Fedora 20
> meant.
>

I'm not saying it isn't ready at all, just not the default.  I and others
still need a way to install on to btrfs if they need to, and frankly it is
good enough for most people to use.  I hope we aren't talking about taking
that option away completely right?  Thanks,

Josef
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20140303/f42c2acf/attachment.html>