Theodore Tso wrote:
So you you would be in OK of a model where we copy fs/ext3 to "fs/ext4", and do development there which would merged rapidly into mainline so that people who want to participate in testing can use ext3dev, while people who want stability can use ext3 --- and at some point, we remove the old ext3 entirely and let fs/ext4 register itself as both the ext3 and ext4 filesystem, and at some point in the future, remove the ext3 name entirely?
Yep, and in addition I would argue that you can take the opportunity to make ext4 default to extents-enabled, and some similar behavior changes (dir_index default?). The existence of both ext3 and ext4 means you can be more aggressive in turning on stuff, IMO.
Jeff - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
