On Fri, February 8, 2008 7:22 pm, Matthew Dillon wrote:

quoted text
>     Yes, and I've agonized over this very possibility.  Maybe the thing
>     to do is to poll the people on kernel@.  HAMMER won't be ready for
>     sure (things take however long they take), but the hardest part of it
>     is working and stable and I'm just down to garbage collection and
>     crash recovery.  Crazily enough, that is what all the major surgery
>     yesterday, and the continuing work, is about.
>
>     So what do people think?  Should this month's release be 1.12 or 2.0 ?

I want 2.0 to have a significant user-visible change to match the major
revision, and HAMMER seems to be that thing.  Do we need another 6 months
to reach that point?

I say "2.0", if people can use HAMMER's features, even if it has bugs or
stability issues; people (ahem) hammering on it is the best way to test
when it's something so basic as a file system.

Have we ever established what the criterion are for declaring HAMMER ready
for release?