On 1/22/25 7:17 AM, mkolman@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > On Wed, 2025-01-22 at 11:19 +0100, Simon de Vlieger wrote: >> Hi Neal (and Dusty), >> >> On 1/15/25 11:53 PM, Aoife Moloney via devel-announce wrote: >>> EROFS is considerably more actively developed than SquashFS, and >>> offers more modern file system features that can be utilized in the >>> future. >> >> Reading some through some of the thread it seems the main motivation >> is >> consolidation of tooling across the OCI, RHEL, and (through OCI) >> Flatpak >> landscape. Could you maybe add that little blurb to the change >> proposal >> wiki? >> >> >> Aside; I'm perhaps a bit conservative in this regard but it seems >> EROFS >> offers no direct benefit in the short term (reading some of this >> thread >> it actually seems to come with some drawbacks, which the >> maintainer(s) >> are trying to address in their spare time?). >> >> Could you expand on the benefits and possible future benefits that >> make >> the change necessary? > Yeah - I do wonder the benefits are really larger than the risks, given > the performance/efficiency issues & unclear timeline for those issues > to be resolved. > > Do we really need to rush this now instead of waiting for the issues to > be resolved first & then switching to an objectively better FS ?
