Taking off my gatekeeper hat and putting on my Stanford representative hat:
Simon Wilkinson <[email protected]> writes: > So, what can be in 1.6 largely falls down to how soon people want it. > If the above process was to start today, my opinion is that demand > attach would have to be removed to do so. But, we could do that, if > there's a desire to get the other features in 1.5 out to an audience > promptly. So, I think there's an equation that looks something like: > > Today: current 1.5 without demand attach > Later: current 1.5 This is what Stanford would like. A 1.5 without demand-attach isn't useful to us, and we want demand-attach fairly badly. It's going to be rather annoying for our plans if we make it into 2010 and demand-attach still isn't available. After demand-attach, our next highest priority is a new security layer that supports better encryption types, however we get that. RxOSD is interesting, but much lower on our wishlist. This is purely a statement of institutional priorities for one institution, not a judgement of how ready various features are or what the broader community might want. Please take it as only one data point. -- Russ Allbery ([email protected]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
