> Even if its a thousand +1 following, it seems to me that its perfectly > Chris Masons decision...
Obviously. > Chris seems to have some ideas on when to release the fsck. Yes, and that idea of when has been drifting in the couple week range for about a year. > So what do you > think you achieve by asking for its release again and again? Best case scenario, everything just gets released in about a week, as per the last estimate. Barring that, a decoupling of the source release from the tools completion, opening up the possibility of no longer having a single point of failure (there is only so much one person can do). If he doesn't have any code that he feels is worth building on, and releasing, then he should come clean about that and open the door for someone else to step in. > It won´t > happen anytime sooner unless you happen to find the holy mantra that > convinces Chris to release it now. I bet thats unlikely. Or if the general consensus is that it is never going to get done, and someone else should take the reigns. > So its either do an fsck for yourself or wait... This would be an appealing option, and one that at least 2 people have pursued to some extent so far, but who wants to invest their time in something like this if all of their efforts are just going to be considered disposable? This is in fact the single biggest problem with Chris promising a tool, and perpetually not delivering it, nor letting anyone see his source. He is guaranteeing that any effort you put into helping out with this would be ultimately wasted. > BTRFS is still experimental software... And yet Chris and Oracle are moving it into production use. > I do not argue that having a nice fsck sooner than later is fine, but I > question the usefulness of repeating reminders. Chris Mason and other > developers possibly working on the fsck should know by now, that you want > it. So its unlikely that "I want it too" is going to change anything. I haven't gotten the impression that Chris is quite that tone deaf, or inconsiderate of the opinions of the community at large. And the discussion you are commenting on was about releasing the source code, not the completed tool. I don't think anyone is saying that Chris needs to work harder and finish it faster. What we are saying is that it would be better for the progress of btrfs in general if the development of fsck were done in an open way, and available for others to contribute to. The main problem with your statement of "Chris Mason and other developers..." is that there does not appear to be any other developers at all. That's what we'd most like to see changed. > Ciao, > -- > Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de > GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in > the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
