From: Ric Wheeler Subject: Re: Ext4 developers get-together at the Collab Summit Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 10:39:20 -0500 Message-ID: <50F96CA8.7090700@gmail.com> References: <20130116120156.GF29162@quack.suse.cz> <50F6D222.2080908@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jan Kara , Theodore Ts'o , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org To: Eric Sandeen Return-path: Received: from mail-qc0-f180.google.com ([209.85.216.180]:64929 "EHLO mail-qc0-f180.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753291Ab3ARPjX (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Jan 2013 10:39:23 -0500 Received: by mail-qc0-f180.google.com with SMTP id v28so2451929qcm.25 for ; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 07:39:22 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <50F6D222.2080908@redhat.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 01/16/2013 11:15 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 1/16/13 6:01 AM, Jan Kara wrote: >> Hello Ted, >> >> On Mon 14-01-13 09:48:00, Ted Tso wrote: >>> The Linux Foundation's Collaboration Summit is April 15-17th, >>> and the Linux Storage, File System, and MM Summit is April 18-19th in >>> San Francisco (at the Parc 55 hotel). >>> >>> I'd like to organize an ext4 developer's meeting during the >>> Collab Summit sometime April 15-17th, since so many of us will hopefully >>> be attending LSF. (The CFP will hopefully be coming soon for LSF.) >>> >>> If you're interested in attending, please reply to this thread, >>> and include some suggested topics that you'd be interested in >>> discussing. Based on the number of topics and the number of people who >>> are planning on attending, I'll know how much time we need to reserve >>> and how big of a room to request. >> I'd be interested in attending the ext4 meeting this year. What I'd like >> to do for the meeting is creating a "map" of ext4 mount options / features >> where we'd see what mount options do we have, which options (or fs features) >> work together and which don't. Then we can either convince ourselves the >> situation with too many / too complex interactions isn't that bad or we can >> come up with simplifications to work on. > BTW, I didn't pay Jan to say that. ;) > > But I think that sounds like an interesting discussion. > > -Eric > > I think that would be great - testing all of the combinations is a nightmare :( ric