Mitch Collinsworth mitch@ccmr.cornell.edu
Thu, 15 Mar 2001 21:14:41 -0500 (EST)

On Thu, 15 Mar 2001, Derrick J Brashear wrote:

> Well, we can't just switch by default on existing platforms because it
> would break compatibility, but it's a desired goal to have the NAMEI
> fileserver working on all supported platforms, and for configure to have
> an option to build that way (it's rather messy to build both a regular and
> a namei fileserver, but it could be done; it's not vastly different than
> the whole "t" versions for threaded environments. but... how many variants
> do you build? where do you draw the line?)

The whole new features/compatibility with IBM AFS  discussion is one
that deserves careful consideration.  Of course we don't want OpenAFS
to run off and make itself non-interoperable with IBM AFS, at least in
the short run.  But IBM has not committed to releasing any new versions
beyone 3.6.  Does this mean *all* future versions of OpenAFS will have
to remain interoperable with IBM AFS 3.6?  Will it someday become a
ball-and-chain that prevents adding useful new functionality?  Has any
thought been given to maintaining compatibility in the short run but
eventually giving up that requirement?  And if so how would such a
decision be made?