NTFS (was Re: [fab] discussion topics for red hat ceo)

[Bill Nottingham]

Greg DeKoenigsberg (gdk at redhat.com) said: 
> > > If NTFS is already in the upstream kernel...
> > > 
> > > ...and if the kernel is specifically covered by OIN...
> > > 
> > > ...and if we're comfortable shipping other risky M$ technologies that are 
> > > specifically covered by OIN...
> > > 
> > > ...then why are we not shipping NTFS in the Fedora kernel?
> > > 
> > > The more I think about it, the more I think it's a *very* simple question.
> > 
> > Point C is not an obvious conclusion from points A and B.
> 
> No?  Tell me why not.
> 
> If the answer is "political reasons that have nothing to do with legal 
> reasons," I can accept that answer.
> 
> However, if the answer is "because we're afraid of getting sued," well 
> then, I think we need to know *exactly* how this situation differs from 
> the Mono situation.

Mono is, for better or worse, a relatively self-contained application.

For something like NTFS, it's different. There is basic FS support
(reading and writing) in the kernel at the moment, yes. But what if
you were to do something like filesystem resizing (online or offline)?
Exporting of the filesystem from userspace? Filesystem creation?

Not all of these things are in the kernel. So, the question is, is the
entire problem space for a technology under OIN?

Bill