From: "Amir G." Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 00/30] Ext4 snapshots - core patches Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2011 20:54:24 +0300 Message-ID: References: <1304959308-11122-1-git-send-email-amir73il@users.sourceforge.net> <4DEE4333.9@redhat.com> <4DEE5C73.806@oracle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Josef Bacik , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu To: Sunil Mushran Return-path: Received: from mail-ww0-f44.google.com ([74.125.82.44]:65239 "EHLO mail-ww0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756843Ab1FGRyZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jun 2011 13:54:25 -0400 Received: by wwa36 with SMTP id 36so5200219wwa.1 for ; Tue, 07 Jun 2011 10:54:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4DEE5C73.806@oracle.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 8:14 PM, Sunil Mushran wrote: > On 06/07/2011 09:46 AM, Amir G. wrote: >> >> I understand the bitterness in btrfs community regarding ext4 snapshot >> feature. You might say the same things about ext4 64bit feature. >> I think it is not up to us to decide how it rolls. it's the users >> and companies involved that dictate where the development happens. > > Bitterness is not the issue. The issue is what happens when your > _patron_ has had enough of the project and decides to stop funding. > My patron is not funding the project for the good of humanity it has customers using the product and relying on the snapshot feature. This is what I meant by market forces driving the development decisions. > Are you going to spend your free time maintaining the entire file system? > Nope. But if we accept the premise that the ext4 snapshots feature is something that can drive a business to more income, than I should have no problem finding a new patron if it comes to that. Cheers, Amir.