On Tue, 22.02.11 22:25, Jon Masters (jonathan(a)jonmasters.org) wrote:
On Tue, 2011-02-22 at 14:51 -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
> 2) Fedora 16 ships without LVM as the volume manager and instead use
> BTRFS's built in volume management, again just for the default.
In my personal opinion, this is a poor design decision. Yes, BTRFS can
do a lot of volume-y things, and these are growing by the day, but I
don't want my filesystem replacing a full volume manager and I am
concerned that this will lead to less testing and exposure to full LVM
use within the Fedora community. Instead, I'd like to counter-propose
that everything stay exactly as it is, with users being able to elect to
switch to BTRFS (sub)volumes if they are interested in doing so.
Should the switch to BTRFS by default happen, this will be one more
thing I will have to fix immediately during installation. The list grows
longer and longer over time - please don't make this change.
Aren't you exaggerating your conservatism a bit?
Are there actually new Fedora features you do support? The only signal
you appear to be sending all the time is "NO!".
Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.