Re: version (was: btrfs, broken design?)

2011-01-26 Thread Diego Calleja
On Miércoles, 26 de Enero de 2011 11:13:20 Erik Logtenberg escribió: > Diego, pls don't read anything negative in my comments, I enjoy and > respect your work very much! If you could find time to add those latest > changes to the wiki, it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for your suggestion, I

Re: version (was: btrfs, broken design?)

2011-01-26 Thread Erik Logtenberg
On 01/21/2011 03:32 PM, Diego Calleja wrote: > On Viernes, 21 de Enero de 2011 10:54:00 Helmut Hullen escribió: > >> And I never have seen somethin like "Changelog" - that would be fine >> too. > > Check the wiki, I keep that updated: > https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Main_Page#News

Re: version (was: btrfs, broken design?)

2011-01-21 Thread Diego Calleja
On Viernes, 21 de Enero de 2011 10:54:00 Helmut Hullen escribió: > And I never have seen somethin like "Changelog" - that would be fine > too. Check the wiki, I keep that updated: https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Main_Page#News -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscrib

Re: version (was: btrfs, broken design?)

2011-01-21 Thread Hugo Mills
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 10:54:00AM +0100, Helmut Hullen wrote: > Hallo, Chris, > > Du meintest am 20.01.11: > > >> Is there a planned date for the final release of btrfs? > > > A final release? We'll keep improving things for a long time. The > > biggest missing feature today is btrfsck, which

version (was: btrfs, broken design?)

2011-01-21 Thread Helmut Hullen
Hallo, Chris, Du meintest am 20.01.11: >> Is there a planned date for the final release of btrfs? > A final release? We'll keep improving things for a long time. The > biggest missing feature today is btrfsck, which I'm working on full > time right now. Could it be possible to tell somewhere

Re: btrfs, broken design?

2011-01-21 Thread Hubert Kario
On Friday 21 of January 2011 09:11:57 Benoît Thiébault wrote: > Ok, thanks, I will read the project wiki more carefully then :-) > Beware however that Wikipedia is the first place to look for information > for a lot of people (whether this is a good practice or not) and it > currently does not prov

Re: btrfs, broken design?

2011-01-21 Thread Benoît Thiébault
Ok, thanks, I will read the project wiki more carefully then :-) Beware however that Wikipedia is the first place to look for information for a lot of people (whether this is a good practice or not) and it currently does not provide a very good advertisement to btrfs. Kind regards Le 21 janv. 2

Re: btrfs, broken design?

2011-01-20 Thread Chester
Btrfs has its own wiki page at https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org which you may find more helpful than what is on wikipedia. 2011/1/20 Benoît Thiébault : > Thanks for your answer > > Le 20 janv. 2011 à 22:20, Chris Mason a écrit : > >> There was a bug fixed as part of that discussion, and I think I als

Re: btrfs, broken design?

2011-01-20 Thread Benoît Thiébault
Thanks for your answer Le 20 janv. 2011 à 22:20, Chris Mason a écrit : > There was a bug fixed as part of that discussion, and I think I also > better described the way the tree balancing works to Edward. Maybe the wikipedia article should be modified then, because it is not very reinsuring :-)

Re: btrfs, broken design?

2011-01-20 Thread Chris Mason
Excerpts from Benoît Thiébault's message of 2011-01-20 16:06:21 -0500: > Hi everyone, > > I am very interested in the features provided by btrfs. > > I know it is still under active development and thus do not consider using it > yet "in production", but the Wikipedia page describing btrfs conta

btrfs, broken design?

2011-01-20 Thread Benoît Thiébault
Hi everyone, I am very interested in the features provided by btrfs. I know it is still under active development and thus do not consider using it yet "in production", but the Wikipedia page describing btrfs contains a very frightening sentence: "Edward Shiskin, one of the Reiser4 developers no