Originally posted by intelfx
View Post
That's also main reason why your "toy feature's" haven't actually made it into thing in the form you complain about - real devs driving the development don't need the particular "feature". If they did, it'd be only because approaching the deployment without any pre-planning.
Are you really trying to imply that systems where "terabytes cost thousands of dollars" (quote from one of the previous posts) are really in practice being deployed without any pre-planning and sysadmins have to drastically re-configure already live production systems? Such idiot sysadmins should be fired on the spot.
What you really are trying to advocate here is nothing but demagogy - take feature from the filesystem you deem "correct" in your subjective ideological purview, feature which is lacking in "incorrect" filesystem ("incorrect" also in your subjective ideological purview) and keep hammering on the said lack thereof - trying to show it as an important problem - thus establishing the implied superiority of your "correct filesystem". Demagogy.
Comment