[OpenAFS] OpenAFS on Linux 2.5.x

[Derrick J Brashear]

On Tue, 15 Jul 2003, Steven Jenkins wrote:

> Derrick J Brashear wrote:
> > Here's the thing: I can spend time fixing code, or I can spend time
> > arguing with people about patches to make it work now. I only have so much
> > time. This comes back to the original comment you thought was arrogant.
> >
> > If I have fewer hours than I need to do everything I'd rather fix things
> > than argue with people about the changes we need to work at all. Your
> > point (I think it was your point) that no one else was doing it is true.
> > No one's volunteering, and I don't have money to hire an arguer;-)

I'll point out that someome else did take up the gauntlet on linux-kernel,
and had no better luck than I did, some time after I said the stuff you
quoted.

> I'm concerned about AFS not running on Linux 2.6. Other organizations
> may have the concern. Solving this problem will require writing code,
> but it will also require convincing the Linux kernel developers to
> incorporate the code. From previous discussion on this list, it seems
> that may not be easy.

Well, worst case is people who care patch their kernels, but that's a high
burden. It won't be "impossible". It will just be "annoying".

> It's too much to ask the OpenAFS developers to also be our user
> advocates. First of all, they don't have the time. But they also don't
> represent the user base in any official capacity, and maybe that's what
> we need to fix.

I suspect most of the problem goes away if Linux kernel vendors are forced
by their paying customers to ship kernels supporting AFS. People who build
from kernel.org source are already building: asking them to apply patches
isn't horrid. CMU doesn't pay anyone, so we're pretty useless there.

Of course, I assume this leaves Debian out in the cold, so it's not really
desirable.

> What do people think about forming an advocacy group? Maybe we'll make
> more headway with the Linux team if we ask them, as major organizational
>   users of AFS, to help ensure that Linux in particular and open source
> software in general continues to be responsive to our needs.

I think it's a good idea. I'm not sure it will get us anything, but the
effort involved seems in range for a gamble, which is what this would be.

> I'm sure I could arrange for some support for such an effort at JPL. I
> don't think it'll require much.