> The thing is that as soon as you seriously give a chance to Bcachefs you see how good it is.

I'm pretty sure Bcachefs is amazing and better than Btrfs. I also think Zfs is amazing and better than Btrfs. Even so, I still use Btrfs because I know it is guaranteed to always be present on any Linux without any effort on my part.

> That might be the best thing happened to the project since now development can happen at its own pace without the clicky bait influencers.

A better approach might have been to just paused mainline merging instead of forcing being kicked out?

Eg "Hey Linus, Bcachefs is still in early development and I need to merge changes in a pace that is not compatible with Linux development process. So I'm going to pause for a while now and once it reaches maintenance status I will focus on submitting patches in a healthy pace that you can digest".

▲

nvme0n1p1 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Even so, I still use Btrfs because I know it is guaranteed to always be present on any Linux without any effort on my part.

100%. My system is rock solid and the last thing I need is rolling the dice after every update on whether my system will boot. https://www.reddit.com/r/archlinux/comments/eywcp7/linux_551...

I'm impressed with bcachefs's accomplishments though, and if they ever reconcile with the kernel I'll surely give it a fair shake.

	▲	koverstreet 35 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		bcachefs on Arch is a bit better supported, we have the distro package maintainer in the bcachefs IRC channel, and I've never lagged on mainline support like ZFS has. Actual distro support, and doing it right with people actually communicating with each other, has always been a priority for the project.

▲

ssl-3 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> I still use Btrfs because I know it is guaranteed to always be present on any Linux without any effort on my part.

I used to think that about ReiserFS, too. It was in the mainline kernel, development was snappy, and it solved some performance problems. I used it all over the place.

Things then subsequently... changed. :-/

▲

doubled112 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> I still use Btrfs because I know it is guaranteed to always be present on any Linux without any effort on my part.

Except RHEL. They don’t include it in their kernels.

Alma Linux started including it again though.

It can never be easy.

▲

irusensei 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think in a perfect world they should had put someone in between to mediate and curate patches while providing DKMS for urgent patches.

As for BTRFS I think its also pretty good. Its just that I have the impression its development is guided by the needs of its sponsors and sadly for us META doesn't need RAID5.

	▲	koverstreet 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Meta doesn't have anyone working on btrfs anymore, it appears to be two guys at SuSE and drive bys.

▲

koverstreet 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I was very up front about where we were at.

A lot of things were tried, people did try to mediate.

The particularly galling thing though was when I finally started looking - post split - comparing bcachefs PRs to other subsystems and especially XFS - I was being more conservative with what I considered a critical bugfix.

There was never a clear statement on what the issue was. What you guys got in public was about as much as I got.

All I can say is - going fast when you're stabilizing and getting bugfixes out the door is what you can and should be doing when you've invested in test coverage, test automation, keeping the codebase clean and asserted, and building up a community that works well together on testing and shaking things out.

I genuinely do not know what they were thinking.