[homebrewer]

As usual, the top comments in that submission are very biased. I think HN should sort comments in a random order in every polarizing discussion. Anyone reading this, do yourself a favor and dig through both links, or ignore the parent's comment altogether.

Linus "regretted" it in the sense "it was a bit too early because bcachefs is moving at such a fast speed", and not in the sense "we got a second btrfs that eats your data for lunch".

Please provide context and/or short human-friendly explanation, because I'm pretty sure most readers won't go further than your comment and will remember it as "Linus regrets merging bcachefs", helping spread FUD for years down the line.

[Novosell]

You're saying this like the takeaway of "Linus regrets merging bcachefs" is unfair when the literal quote from Linus is "[...] I'm starting to regret merging bcachefs." And earlier he says "Nobody sane uses bcachefs and expects it to be stable[...]".

I don't understand how you can read Linus' response and think "Linus regrets merging bcachefs" is an unfair assessment.

[tekknik]

what attachment to bcachefs do you have? the concerns are valid and at first i didn’t read it ask Linus not wanting another btrfs. But now thinking about it, why do we have another competing filesystem being developed at this point at all?

[clan]

Well. Point taken. You have an important core of truth to your argument about polarization.

But...

Strongly disagree.

I think that is a very unfair reading of what I wrote. I feel that you might have a bias which shows but that would be the same class of ad hominem as you have just displayed. That is why I choose to react even though it might be wise to let slepping dogs lie. We should minimize polarization but not to a degree where we cannot have civilized disagreement. You are then doing exactly what you preach not to do. Is that then FUD with FUD on top? Two wrongs make a right?

I was reacting on the implicit approval in mentioning that it had been upstreamed in the kernel. The reason for the first link. Regrets where clearly expressed.

Another HN trope is rehashing the same discussions over and over again. That was the reason for the second link. I would like to avoid yet another discussion on a topic which was put into light less than 14 days ago. Putting that more bluntly would have been impolite and polarizing. Yet here I am.

The sad part is that my point got through to you loud and clear. Sad because rather than simply dismissing as polarizing that would have been a great opener for a discussion. Especially in the context of ZFS and durability.

You wrote:

> Linus "regretted" it in the sense "it was a bit too early because bcachefs is moving at such a fast speed", and not in the sense "we got a second btrfs that eats your data for lunch".

If you allow me a little lighthearted response. The first thing which comes to mind was the "They're the same picture" meme[1] from The Office. Some like to move quickly and break things. That is a reasonable point of view. But context matters. For long term data storage I am much more conservative. So while you might disagree; to me it is the exact same picture.

Hence I very much object to what I feel is an ad hominem attack because your own worldview was not reflected suitably in my response. It is fair critique that you feel it is FUD. I do however find it warranted for a filesystem which is marked experimental. It might be the bees knees but in my mind it is not ready for mainstream use. Yet.

That is an important perspective for the OP to have. If the OP just want to play around all is good. If the OP does not mind moving quickly and break things, fine. But for production use? Not there yet. Not in my world.

Telling people to ignore my comment because you know people cannot be bothered to actually read the links? And then lecturing me that people might take the wrong spin on it? Please!

[1] https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/theyre-the-same-picture