Bcachefs may be headed out of the kernel

So the assertion is that users with (critical) data loss bugs need complete solutions for recovery and damage containment with all possible speed, and without this "last mile" effort, stability will never be achieved.

The objection is the tiniest bug-fix windows get everything but the kitchen sink.

These are both uncomfortable positions to occupy, without doubt.

No, the assertion is that the proper response to a bug often (and if it's high impact - always) involves a lot more than just the bugfix.

And the whole reason for a filesystem's existence is to store and maintain your data, so if that is what the patch if for, yes, it should be under consideration as a hotfix.

There's also the broader context: it's a major problem for stabilization if we can't properly support the people using it so they can keep testing.

More context: the kernel as a whole is based on fixed time tables and code review, which it needs because QA (especially automated testing) is extremely spotty. bcachefs's QA, both automated testing and community testing, is extremely good, and we've had bugfix patchsets either held up or turn into flamewars because of this mismatch entirely too many times.

Kent, it’s actually really simple: bcachefs is experimental. Those that are currently using bcachefs and those that can’t wait for a data recovery tool that hasn’t existed until now is a group containing precisely zero people.

You’re acting like bcachefs systems are storing Critical Data That Absolutely Cannot Be Lost. And yet at the same time it’s experimental. I’m just one user, but I can tell you that, even as excited as I am about bcachefs, I’m not touching it with a ten foot pole for anything beyond playing around until at least the experimental label is removed.

I imagine my position is not uncommon.

Please stop trying to die on this hill. Your project is really great and really important. I want it to succeed.

Just chill and let bug fixes be bug fixes and features be features.