On 05/01/2015 09:09 PM, David C. Rankin wrote:
It needs reporting upstream so real-world data is available to the developers, who obviously don't live in it
I do note a couple of things that need to be taken into account before doing the Chicken Little dance. 1. Jdd did not say what version of BtrFS & utilities, or kernel this is. There are two issues there. The first is that such information is needed for a bug report The Second is to see if this has bee reported already for that version. 2. I watch the btrfs-users list and there are, on average, 5 patches or revisions a day. These seem to be fixes. I see the occasions request for an upgrade, but that is not an area where things are being aggressively persuaded. The reason I mention this is that your argument, David, is weakened by the fact that not only are developers taking note of problems but they are actively working on this. It is unfair to condemn n BtrFS when this much commitment is being made towards its success. I sympathise with the idea that BtrFS, like KDE4, has been forced on users, but the reality is that unless this kind of push is made how else are users going to aggressively debug this in the field, as you quite rightly point out. There is a limit to what developers can do unaided. It is unfortunate that this technique also garners a bad reputation for the later, stable, functional releases. -- A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org