Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 26 Feb 2002 18:18:10 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 26 Feb 2002 18:17:33 -0500 Received: from dsl-213-023-039-032.arcor-ip.net ([213.23.39.32]:42893 "EHLO starship.berlin") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 26 Feb 2002 18:17:10 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: Daniel Phillips To: Steve Lord Subject: Re: Congrats Marcelo, Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 01:10:01 +0100 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.2] Cc: Andreas Dilger , "Dennis, Jim" , "'linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org'" In-Reply-To: <2D0AFEFEE711D611923E009027D39F2B153AD4@cdserv.meridian-data.com> <1014764852.9994.191.camel@jen.americas.sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <1014764852.9994.191.camel@jen.americas.sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On February 27, 2002 12:07 am, Steve Lord wrote: > On Sun, 2002-02-24 at 17:39, Daniel Phillips wrote: > > I'd really like to see XFS go in, but don't you think 2.5 is the place, > > with a view to 2.4 submission in due course? > > This is my thinking, but the way 2.5 is diverging the argument that > xfs being stable in 2.5 prior to going into 2.4 probably will not mean > too much at the end of the day since the interfaces will probably > have diverged so much by then - and the interfaces are where the > nasties tend to come out. The core of XFS is pretty darn stable. It will mean a lot. It will mean Linus signed off on the integration, and that the issues were examined. Marcelo is perfectly capable of determining what the additional 2.4 issues are, if any. -- Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/