From: Tilman Schmidt <tilman@imap.cc>
To: Diego Calleja <diegocg@gmail.com>
Cc: Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>,
Lexington.Luthor@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: "Why Reuser 4 still is not in" doc
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 08:52:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200607200652.k6K6q771011722@posthamster.phnxsoft.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060716220115.a1891231.diegocg@gmail.com>
On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 22:01:15 +0200, Diego Calleja wrote:
> Maybe it's too late and reiser 4 will get in in the next release, but
> I've written this doc into the kernelnewbies' wiki:
> http://wiki.kernelnewbies.org/WhyReiser4IsNotIn . If you disagree with
> something in that doc, edit it or just answer to this mail what you want
> to see in it and I'll add it myself.
It could be improved in two ways in order to better convince people:
Firstly, mention some (perhaps even all) of the actual technical
issues preventing the inclusion of Reiser4. Right now, you are
giving much space to the political issues (or their non-existence).
This answers a different question ("Why we are fed up with the
Reiser4 discussion") than the one in the title, and in the worst
case might leave a reader with the impression that political
reasons are more important after all.
Secondly, the questions in the FAQ part should probably be put in a
less loaded form. For example, Q1 could just read objectively:
"Why can't Reiser4 be included as an experimental feature?"
As it stands now, I fear too many people's reaction upon reading it
will be: "That's not my question." At least leave off the plaintive
initial "but" on Q1 and Q2. It puts off the readers you want to
convince.
HTH
Tilman
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-07-20 6:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-07-16 16:16 reiserFS? Xavier Roche
2006-07-16 16:28 ` reiserFS? Christian Trefzer
2006-07-16 16:56 ` reiserFS? Theodore Tso
2006-07-16 17:26 ` reiserFS? Lexington Luthor
2006-07-16 17:48 ` reiserFS? Theodore Tso
2006-07-16 20:01 ` "Why Reuser 4 still is not in" doc (was: 'reiserFS?') Diego Calleja
2006-07-16 21:11 ` "Why Reuser 4 still is not in" doc Lexington Luthor
2006-07-16 21:28 ` Joshua Hudson
2006-07-16 22:53 ` Lexington Luthor
2006-07-17 9:42 ` Jan Engelhardt
2006-07-17 16:38 ` Lexington Luthor
2006-07-20 6:52 ` Tilman Schmidt [this message]
2006-07-16 17:46 ` reiserFS? Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2006-07-16 18:14 ` reiserFS? Theodore Tso
2006-07-17 15:01 ` reiserFS? Matthias Andree
2006-07-17 21:07 ` reiserFS? Helge Hafting
2006-07-17 11:25 "Why Reuser 4 still is not in" doc Al Boldi
2006-07-17 14:33 ` Jan Engelhardt
2006-07-17 18:41 ` Horst von Brand
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200607200652.k6K6q771011722@posthamster.phnxsoft.com \
--to=tilman@imap.cc \
--cc=Lexington.Luthor@gmail.com \
--cc=diegocg@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®