On Monday 17 July 2006 17:03, Rahul wrote: > I believe it is better to get them supported or drop them completely > instead of the current status quo which leads to a less tested and > potentially dangerous option being provided to provided to end users > (though they have to enable it explicitly). Without good support, things > like SELinux in reiserfs to pick a example would end up being broken now > and then and that isnt a good thing at all. > > Realistically we need to make a hard choice on this. explain that well, > stick to that and make sure that support well what we do rather than > provide a multitude of half baked options (kernel-unsupported comes to > mind for those aware of the pains we had with it). There are people out there that use these for more than just migration. There are people that do NOT use selinux, nor wish to, and for them these file systems work well enough. If we don't provide what we're doing now, these people will be looking for rebuilds of the distro/installer with support for said file systems. We don't want that, we want to encourage people to play in our sandbox. We could do a popup window (much like we do for rawhide installs) when reiserfs or xfs options are detected with a bit "Warning: this file system may eat your baby" or even a paren next to the file system option when choosing to format (UNSUPPORTED FS!). We provide _lots_ of ways for our users to shoot themselves in the foot. This is just one of them. -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora
Attachment:
pgpzk9ZYOL3ny.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board-readonly mailing list fedora-advisory-board-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board-readonly
