Linked by Amjith Ramanujam on Fri 25th Jul 2008 16:08 UTC, submitted by diegocg
Daniel Phillips has announced the prototype design of a new linux filesystem (implementation has only begun). The most interesting thing seems to be a different way of implementing versioning: "Unlike the currently fashionable recursive copy on write designs with one tree root per version, Tux3 stores all its versioning information in the leaves of btrees using the versioned pointer algorithm. This method promises a significant shrinkage of metadata for heavily versioned filesystems as compared to ZFS and Btrfs".
Permalink for comment 324699
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2006-03-01
But it is kinda weird that they are all for sharing code but yet they have a problem with giving back to diffenrent bsd licensed projects don't you think? Now who's the hypocrite?
problem is, the BSD license ( and BSD licensed projects) actually is about, unidirectional spreading of the code, as wide as possibile - with no contributing back required (of course it's welcome, but it's not mandated)
giving away the code for others to use it and integrate it ( or parts of it) in their own projects (relicensing is also possible) in order to it to be considered the reference implementation of what it represents (be it a specification, an algorithm, or a combination thereof, such as a "unix" variant) is an intended result
and it has to be that way, given the environment the BSD license was born (academic research, whose results were to be openly available)
otoh, the gpl requires code contributions in return - not only that, it requires the code to stay open, thus remaining "free" being protected from those menacing its "freedom"
bu that was meant to satisfy the first requirement of "free software" as a distributed development method ( apart from any social and ethical implication, that is ): to ensure that sw development is done cooperatively among peers, the SW is required to stay "free"
but then that SW is not intended as, and will hardly become, an industry standard reference implementation
closed source developers will have to develop their own (based on the BSD one, maybe), but that is often the goal in this case...
bottom line, given their respective goals and backgrounds, expecting the same from the GPL and the BSD ( or projects using oneof them) is not fair towards either ...