Bcachefs Changes End Up Being Merged Into Linux 6.16, For 6.17: "We'll Be Parting Ways"
Bcachefs Changes End Up Being Merged Into Linux 6.16, For 6.17: "We'll Be Parting Ways"
Last week was a Bcachefs pull request consisting of fixes and a new 'journal_rewind' feature to aide as a disaster recovery tool for the file-systemwww.phoronix.com
like this
CoyoteFacts
in reply to cm0002 • • •Re: [GIT PULL] bcachefs fixes for 6.16-rc4 - Kent Overstreet
lore.kernel.orgSufferingSteve
in reply to cm0002 • • •It's interesting how both of these guys who seems to both be firmly in the "don't break shit for the users" camp, and both are very adamant about quality of code in the kernel can't get along, saddens me a bit.
I'm excited about bcachefs, I'm even planning a migration from btrfs, but I need to battle test my offsite backup a bit more before having the guts to walk into bcachefs land.
Might wait for 6.18,6.19 or something and follow any future drama
ikidd
in reply to SufferingSteve • • •like this
dgdft likes this.
MentalEdge
in reply to SufferingSteve • • •From what I've read, Kent expects others to just take his word for it, when he says his code wont break anything.
The kernel has long had practices around merging and releasing, specifically so that it no longer has to rely on contributors simply promising that their contributions have been tested and confirmed safe.
But Kent has repeatedly skirted or straight up ignored those practices.
This isn't about not agreeing on code needing to be reliable. It's about one person refusing to work with an established way of achieving that when contributing to an upstream effort.
He's been told how to contribute again, and again, and again. And every time he takes it like it's a personall affront to his credibility.
like this
falseprophet likes this.
onewithoutaname
in reply to cm0002 • • •