[LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] Limits of development
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: lsf-pc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "linux-nvme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-nvme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-scsi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-block@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: [LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] Limits of development
- From: Hannes Reinecke <hare@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2023 12:49:43 +0100
- User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.5.1
Hi all,
given the recent discussion on the mailing list I would like to propose
a topic for LSF/MM:
Limits of development
In recent times quite some development efforts were left floundering
(Non-Po2 zones, NVMe dispersed namespaces), while others (like blk-snap)
went ahead. And it's hard to figure out why some projects are deemed
'good', and others 'bad'.
I would like to have a discussion at LSF/MM about what are valid reasons
for future developments, and maybe even agree on common guidelines where
developers can refer to when implementing new features.
Cheers,
Hannes
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]
[SCSI Target Devel]
[Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]
[Kernel Newbies]
[IDE]
[Security]
[Git]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Linux ATA RAID]
[Linux IIO]
[Samba]
[Device Mapper]