[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 22:41:17 +0800
- From: cquark at gmail.com (Wei Shen)
- Subject: GSOC Replies
On 3/25/08, x ray <rayx.cn at gmail.com> wrote:
> I agreed with Joel because (1)not try to introduce big change at one
> time (2) each milestone is reachable (3)when each milestone achieved,
> user's application will not break.
> The drawback is, there might be some duplicate job.
> Wei, what is your opinion ?
I totally agree. As I already noted, I will not add VFS implementation to
the GSoC proposal, but I would like to add "a survey of VFS implementation
based on IMFS" as a task.
On 3/25/08, Wei Shen <cquark at gmail.com> wrote:
> If people of RTEMS trust me, I would like to make it a long term plan, but
> at current stage, I feel I am not experienced enough to undertake that.
> Redesign FS infrastructure for an OS is really a serious task, though in
> RTEMS, IMFS and jnode provide a good start point - they in fact accomplish
> lots of work the VFS layer does. Maybe, after sufficient work on FIFO, file
> descriptor, and aio, I will be more comfident of trying.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
- GSOC Replies
- From: joel.sherrill at OARcorp.com (Joel Sherrill)