> In my opinion, it is not necessarily too late for an OpenAFS Foundation. > It is too late for an OpenAFS Foundation to market the existing > implementation. > > Jeffrey Altman > >
I completely agree that marketing the existing implementation is a waste of time. What does seem to be worth marketing are two things, to two (superficially) very different audiences: 1) the YFSI implementation, to 'enterprise' users, with the laundry list of required enterprise features 2) A Debian-free-software guidelines compliant implementation, which could, in theory be derived from the existing implementation, or from a release of a subset of the YFSI implementation in, say 5 years. As far as I am aware, AFS has the longest history of operation of any 'enterprise' class filesystem, and if we can actually pull together a foundation with sufficient funding to show a roadmap for 5 to 10 years with both enterprise and free software components, we have an extremely compelling story for long-term file storage which no other filesystem or product can come close to matching. I will also argue that any enterprise user that is interested in recovering data being stored now in 15 to 20 years will see the value of (2) above. _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
