On 09/03/2017 09:20 PM, Dhaval Giani wrote:
On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 9:02 PM Alvin Starr via talk <talk@gtalug.org <mailto:talk@gtalug.org>> wrote:
On 09/03/2017 02:53 PM, Dhaval Giani via talk wrote:
On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 2:13 PM William Park via talk <talk@gtalug.org <mailto:talk@gtalug.org>> wrote:
On Sun, Sep 03, 2017 at 05:52:12PM +0000, Dhaval Giani wrote: > On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 1:41 PM William Park via talk <talk@gtalug.org <mailto:talk@gtalug.org>> > wrote: > > Now, I read (it's an old news, though) that BTRFS is being "deprecated" > > by Redhat, and presumably others will follow. > > Where have you read this news? As far as I know btrfs is actively being > developed and no one is stopping development.
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/08/16/red_hat_banishes_btrfs_from_rhel/
https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7/htm...
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Red-Hat-Deprecates-Btrfs-Again
Still doesn't say that upstream development has stopped.
Dhaval
True enough. But with Redhat voting with their feet it will make the uptake of BTRFS much slower if at all.
Redhat was never a major contributor to btrfs. The folks who are on btrfs like it and will continue fund its development. We might see a btrfs v2 similar to ext3 and ext4. But only time will tell. Please let's not equate red hat with upstream kernel development. There are a lot of us who are unrelated to red hat doing it as well.
Thanks Dhaval
I was not trying to equate RH with BTRFS development but pointing out that when a major distribution provider decides to drop a project that they once included its a big hit for the project. -- Alvin Starr || voice: (416)585-9971x690 Interlink Connectivity || fax: (416)585-9974 alvin@iplink.net ||