Rainer Orth wrote:
Eric Lowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
What about file systems? Why have ZFS and UFS communities (and possibly
NFS in the future) instead of one file system community with three file
system projects under it?
Speaking of which, it occured to me recently, when I posted a question
about the interaction of zfs, automount/autofs and nfs to nfs-discuss and
zfs-discuss, but got no reply whatsoever
http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=6717&tstart=0
that a different organization of the filesystem and storage related
communities might be much better than what we currently have:
I can think of two models here:
* Create a new filesystems community to subsume the existing zfs, ufs and
nfs communities as projects. There might be a new autofs/automount
community as well, and the recent proposal for a cifs community would
naturally fall in as a cifs project, as has already been suggested.
The problem is what to do with svm, which doesn't fall under filesystems.
* Therefore, an alternative model would be to use the storage community
(given that block and object based storage are getting closer recently,
cf. the object storage devices work for SCSI) as an umbrella for both
block-based storage (e.g. iscsi, svm projets, maybe others?) and
filesystems (with the projects mentioned above).
Thoughts?
After going through this thread I've had similar thoughts. Since the
postings are dwindling off I think we may have more or less reached a
group concensus.
I'm going to go off and draft up a set of proposals to replace our
original single proposal, and submit them as separate threads to
facilitate further discussion.
Thanks for all the great feedback everybody. I think we have a great
atmosphere set here for positive change.
- Eric
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
