Re: Btrfs status for F16

2011-08-08 Thread Robyn Bergeron
On 08/08/2011 05:44 AM, Josef Bacik wrote: > Hello, > > In order to hopefully (and I understand this is a unrealistically big > hope) stem the amount of hostile comments and random remarks about > Btrfs not being ready for F16 that I get with _every_ bz that get's > filed against it, let me announc

Re: Btrfs status for F16

2011-08-08 Thread Michael Cronenworth
Farkas Levente wrote: > something better. there is no roadmap, who is responsible for what which > is the planed kernel version, how do you plane raid-5/6 integration etc... You mean, like this[1]? [1] https://wiki.mozilla.org/QA/Fennec/Milestones/8.0#Features_Tracked -- devel mailing list devel

Re: Btrfs status for F16

2011-08-08 Thread Farkas Levente
On 08/08/2011 07:48 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: Sounds good ... can you give us an update and ballpark timeline of RAID-5 on btrfs as well if you don't mind? >>> >>> It requires the larger than page size blocksize work which is slated >>> for 3.2, I'm not sure what Chris has in mind speci

Re: Btrfs status for F16

2011-08-08 Thread Peter Robinson
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 6:31 PM, Farkas Levente wrote: > On 08/08/2011 04:07 PM, Josef Bacik wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 9:22 AM, Genes MailLists wrote: >>> On 08/08/2011 08:55 AM, Josef Bacik wrote: On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Matej Cepl wrote: > On 8.8.2011 14:44, Josef Bacik

Re: Btrfs status for F16

2011-08-08 Thread Farkas Levente
On 08/08/2011 04:07 PM, Josef Bacik wrote: > On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 9:22 AM, Genes MailLists wrote: >> On 08/08/2011 08:55 AM, Josef Bacik wrote: >>> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Matej Cepl wrote: On 8.8.2011 14:44, Josef Bacik wrote: > I appreciate those who will continue to use it a

Re: Btrfs status for F16

2011-08-08 Thread Ric Wheeler
On 08/08/2011 01:44 PM, Josef Bacik wrote: > Hello, > > In order to hopefully (and I understand this is a unrealistically big > hope) stem the amount of hostile comments and random remarks about > Btrfs not being ready for F16 that I get with _every_ bz that get's > filed against it, let me announc

Re: Btrfs status for F16

2011-08-08 Thread Josef Bacik
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 9:22 AM, Genes MailLists wrote: > On 08/08/2011 08:55 AM, Josef Bacik wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Matej Cepl wrote: >>> On 8.8.2011 14:44, Josef Bacik wrote: I appreciate those who will continue to use it and report bugs, we are working very hard on

Re: Btrfs status for F16

2011-08-08 Thread Genes MailLists
On 08/08/2011 08:55 AM, Josef Bacik wrote: > On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Matej Cepl wrote: >> On 8.8.2011 14:44, Josef Bacik wrote: >>> I appreciate those who will continue to use it and report bugs, we are >>> working very hard on trying to get everything more stable and it is a >>> slow goin

Re: Btrfs status for F16

2011-08-08 Thread Josef Bacik
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Matej Cepl wrote: > On 8.8.2011 14:44, Josef Bacik wrote: >> I appreciate those who will continue to use it and report bugs, we are >> working very hard on trying to get everything more stable and it is a >> slow going process.  With your help we will be in a better

Re: Btrfs status for F16

2011-08-08 Thread Matej Cepl
On 8.8.2011 14:44, Josef Bacik wrote: > I appreciate those who will continue to use it and report bugs, we are > working very hard on trying to get everything more stable and it is a > slow going process. With your help we will be in a better situation > for F17. Thanks, So, no increase of your

Btrfs status for F16

2011-08-08 Thread Josef Bacik
Hello, In order to hopefully (and I understand this is a unrealistically big hope) stem the amount of hostile comments and random remarks about Btrfs not being ready for F16 that I get with _every_ bz that get's filed against it, let me announce this as clearly as possible BTRFS WILL NOT BE THE D