[OpenAFS-devel] Re: [OpenAFS] Re: 1.6 and post-1.6 OpenAFS branch management and schedule

[Andrew Deason]

On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 22:06:32 +0200
Stephan Wiesand <stephan.wiesand@desy.de> wrote:

> sorry, I disagree. If you (the developers and the gatekeepers) are
> sure that DAFS is the way forward, and reasonably close to being
> ready, 1.6 and on should not support anything else. Why defer this to
> 1.10?

For one, DAFS does not (and possibly cannot, but I can't speak to it)
support inode fileservers. For another, many people do not trust DAFS as
stable enough to use; it hasn't been used in many environments yet.  It
also requires configuration changes (well, at least one), as well as
arguably a change in thinking about some things, so you can't just use
it as a drop-in replacement.

I think these are all reasons to not force DAFS upon people when they
had no real option to use it before. With 1.6, the existing plan gives
people an easy way to use DAFS if they want, and further on down the
road they will be forced to. This gives some flexibility on when the
switchover to DAFS will happen for them.

There's also that there's no equivalent of fast-restart for DAFS, but
something tells me that's not what is making this decision :)

-- 
Andrew Deason
adeason@sinenomine.net