The XFStest scenario assumes that Fedora is being somewhat innovative... in this instance we're not. We're playing catch-up. The horse has already left the barn. The longer we delay, the sillier we look. The requirement is obvious. The bugzilla on it is active. They'll either turn it on, or explain why not. People can then judge for themselves.
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 10:41 AM, Rahul Sundaram <methe...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi > > On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Gerald B. Cox wrote: > >> >> Well, I don't think the majority of folks would agree that F2FS is "some >> random filesystem". >> You'll either turn it on, or explain why not. The community can then >> judge for themselves. >> > > That is not how it works. The default position is to disable any feature > unless there is some requirement to enable it. If you request something to > be enabled, you will have to be willing to do some amount of work to make > it happen. Eric has indicated what could convince Fedora kernel > developers. Would you be willing to do that? > > Rahul > > -- > devel mailing list > devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct >
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
