On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Adam Williamson <[email protected]> wrote:
> Well, no, you're getting cause and effect mixed up, there. RH doesn't > have btrfs developers on staff *because* RH, over time, has broadly > come to the conclusion that btrfs isn't the storage tech it wants to > roll with. It's not that RH can't support btrfs for paying customers > because it has no btrfs devs, it's more that RH has decided it doesn't > want to support btrfs for paying customers so it doesn't hire any btrfs > devs. > Notwithstanding even if Redhat wanted it, the Btrfs folks admit that it isn't ready for Redhat's customer base.
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
