[dm-devel] [PATCH v3 0/4] dm-replicator: introduce new remote replication target
James Bottomley
James.Bottomley at HansenPartnership.com
Tue Dec 8 18:42:27 UTC 2009
On Tue, 2009-12-01 at 18:18 +0100, Heinz Mauelshagen wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-12-01 at 17:41 +0100, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> > On 2009-12-01T17:05:03, heinzm at redhat.com wrote:
> > > Please review for upstream inclusion.
> >
> > Should this not be Cc'ed to LKML if you aim for upstream inclusion? I
> > actually would expect that most of the criticism of drbd's inclusion
> > would also apply here, no? (With the added point that dm-replicator does
> > not actually have any users yet.)
>
> We have a series of patches to sort out basic issues on dm-devel.
> The usual process is, that agk as the subsystem maintainer integrates
> and upstreams it.
Could I just echo Lars' statement. With the upstream inclusion of drbd,
dm-replicator becomes a *third* replication system asking to be in
kernel. It is definitely a kernel policy question of whether we want
three separate replicators, and so should be Cc'd to lkml so that people
interested in that can weigh in.
James
More information about the dm-devel
mailing list