Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 22 Jul 2002 11:42:10 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 22 Jul 2002 11:42:09 -0400 Received: from pc2-cwma1-5-cust12.swa.cable.ntl.com ([80.5.121.12]:32506 "EHLO irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 22 Jul 2002 11:42:08 -0400 Subject: Re: [2.6] Most likely to be merged by Halloween... THE LIST From: Alan Cox To: Daniel Phillips Cc: Joe Thornber , Guillaume Boissiere , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: References: <3D361091.13618.16DC46FB@localhost> <20020722102342.GE1196@fib011235813.fsnet.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.3 (1.0.3-6) Date: 22 Jul 2002 17:57:57 +0100 Message-Id: <1027357077.31782.50.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1014 Lines: 22 On Mon, 2002-07-22 at 16:22, Daniel Phillips wrote:developed equivalent > Supposing both device-mapper and (the kernel part of) EVMS get into the tree, > there's nothing stopping you from submitting a patch to make EVMS use > device-mapper. If there's already equivalent code in EVMS, that just makes > the job easier. So we end up with twice as much code to debug and lots of incompatibilities when people want to switch around. It would be far better if the two sets of userspace code could at least agree on a common kernel interface > I'm firmly in the 'we need both' camp. If there is something important in only one then that matters. If there are important features in each that are not in the other then that really proves they should merge the projects - 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/