On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 01:33:12PM +0000, Robie Basak wrote: > On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 09:49:17PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > > It's not ideal for an interface to go from unsupported to mandatory in a > > single LTS cycle; but I don't believe that the use case of creating a > > filesystem with one LTS release, then interacting with it using the > > userspace tools from a previous LTS release, is significant enough to > > justify holding back features that upstream has recommended as the default.
> > I think it suffices to document this in the release notes. > Thanks. What's your opinion on an SRU to Xenial and/or to Trusty that > allows e2fsprogs to understand the future filesystem feature? Assuming > that no default behaviour would be changed for stable release users, > would this be acceptable to you in principle? It would be acceptable to me in principle, but I don't expect it to be an "easy" SRU to do. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
