Fedora Doesn't Yet Enable F2FS File-System Support

[liam]

Well, BTRFS is another issue all together - and BTW, it's there. I've been using BTRFS Raid6 since F20. It's not the default.... yet... but I would expect that happening around F23 since the BTRFS FB developers
have been making quite a few improvements.

Back to the issue at hand however, F2FS - the "experimental/dangerous" rationale just doesn't hold weight if Google is using it for Nexus 9 and
Ubuntu of all distributions is including it. That isn't intended to be a bash against Ubuntu either... it's critical of Fedora. Ubuntu in my mind
has always been targeted to people who are new to Linux... something easy to learn and use. So, F2FS isn't an issue for new users, but
is too dangerous for the Fedora user? That's just ridiculous.

Yes, it's a different issue but my point is that he's taken a strong stance against both topics without, IMHO, good reason. I suppose if he was the one responsible for handling issues in those areas that's one thing but I don't think he's a fs dev.

[liam]

A) Take it
B) Leave it
C) Shit on RedHat or someone who disagrees with RedHat?

I, for one, look down upon every last one of you for never trying cow's milk with maple syrup. My digestive system takes it just fine. My taste buds say it's great. My subjective take on maple syrup milk and my asshole reign supreme on this matter, filthy peasants.

Don't any of you get me started on underwear or potato bread. Those are super serious cans of worms right there.

Heh, I actually really like maple milk. I had for the first time in this Asian restaurant in Boston called mei mei. Really fantastic.

[jimbohale]

Ok, I re-read the original post, that said:

"I suspect they have good reasons for not including it... they are clearly not idiots."

My first reading was more or less: "Their decision must be the right one (for Fedora users), as they are not idiots". Now, you might understand that this upset me, because at Google, they are not idiots too, and decided to drop ext3 support from chrome os and disable using sd cards in Android Kitkat for "security reasons".

But as I look at it now, the sentence only says: "Their decision must be the right one (for them), as they are not idiots", to which I have no objections at all, even in the knowing that companies full of clever people occasionally still do make wrong decisions for themselves. But that's none of my business.

So, I take back the "fuck you" and take your "fuck off" on my chin.
Bye

That's not exactly what I said. What I said was 'They are not idiots, so maybe they have a very real reason for not including it'. That very literally means perhaps there is a reason they did it, and that's worth investigating. There was no hidden message, no 'RHEL knows best', nothing. It's possible that they don't have a valid reason and it is just politics, but it's also possible that it's not, but I don't know and honestly I don't care, I was just speculating what might possibly be the case. It seems that it's just that it's not tested enough for their standards, but I don't know and given that I don't use Linux on my desktop anymore it's not an issue for me so I don't care.

Personally I think that they have little desire to be the bleeding edge OS anymore, and their reasoning is that they don't want their bug reports to be filled with people complaining about their f2fs filesystems breaking, which they probably think is the case. However, that could be false .

[AdamW]

Personally I think that they have little desire to be the bleeding edge OS anymore, and their reasoning is that they don't want their bug reports to be filled with people complaining about their f2fs filesystems breaking, which they probably think is the case. However, that could be false .

This whole thread seems like rather an absurd storm in a teacup.

The bugs Phoronix linked to were a year and a half old; the later of the two refers to kernel 3.9. In kernel terms, that's ancient. Yet the article was written as if the response given there was the Fedora kernel maintainers' *current* thinking, and off went the Phoronix cavalry on the charge about how silly Fedora kernel maintainers are.

Knowing Josh and Eric (but, disclaimer, not knowing the specific details of this particular case), I think "the reasoning" here was most likely "we haven't thought about this at all lately because no-one asked".

If someone had just added a comment on the bug saying "hey, it's now 18 months later, can we look at this again?" then I'm pretty sure the response would've been something like "sure, let's see..." followed by a nice no-drama discussion. But because people got the wrong idea from the article and wrote long screeds with stuff like "Something isn't right. I thought Fedora was suppose to be on the leading edge. Is this some sort of political thing with Redhat/Samsung?", "Its just amazing how some distro and company can be hostile to their users and especially enthusiasts willing to try new technologies here and there.", naturally the devs are going to get defensive.

[jimbohale]

This whole thread seems like rather an absurd storm in a teacup.

The bugs Phoronix linked to were a year and a half old; the later of the two refers to kernel 3.9. In kernel terms, that's ancient. Yet the article was written as if the response given there was the Fedora kernel maintainers' *current* thinking, and off went the Phoronix cavalry on the charge about how silly Fedora kernel maintainers are.

Knowing Josh and Eric (but, disclaimer, not knowing the specific details of this particular case), I think "the reasoning" here was most likely "we haven't thought about this at all lately because no-one asked".

If someone had just added a comment on the bug saying "hey, it's now 18 months later, can we look at this again?" then I'm pretty sure the response would've been something like "sure, let's see..." followed by a nice no-drama discussion. But because people got the wrong idea from the article and wrote long screeds with stuff like "Something isn't right. I thought Fedora was suppose to be on the leading edge. Is this some sort of political thing with Redhat/Samsung?", "Its just amazing how some distro and company can be hostile to their users and especially enthusiasts willing to try new technologies here and there.", naturally the devs are going to get defensive.

I agree. People just jumping to conclusions when it's not immediately obvious what was truly the case, and even so the Fedora maintainers probably have their very pragmatic reasons for whatever decisions they make.