![]() Its just that, nobody who isn't a data storage nerd knows about it. X should be the responsibility of Y, at least to the bare minimum base-function level.Ī tool isn't refined until it looks like a tool.Īnd btrfs (like ntfs, fat, ext) is 'ready' for Prime time. When you make an amazing technology (like a filesystem, hint hint), it's not finished until the barrier for 'newb' entry has been broken. This goes way further than btrfs, but it's something most of the Foss community needs to think about. But the odds he'll be interested in using nails is much higher if the 'hammer' has a handle, and an obvious orientation. To an ape, a piece of Iron is just as much a nailing device, as a hammer is. ![]() However for users btrfs is a tool they use to store their data, and if it's not instantly user friendly it's not an ideal tool. Well a lot.ītrfs is a filesystem full stop. The FOSS community has a habit of not considering 'interface' or 'appeal' as part of their software, and it damages. Its really important for any technology to be approachable by the most entry level of user, to gain traction even in an enterprise environment because if 5 million people use a technology (even if they don't understand it), that's more jobs/administration required, than if only 500 people used it.Ī big issue *nix software has in general, is the idea that X isn't the responsibility of Y. Before someone disputes that, just consider almost every *buntu based distro, and the (horrible imo) changes to Gnome3. Linux has been trying to 'break into' common user space for a long time. ![]() I'm going to comment something I just said in a reply, to highlight it:
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |