RE: [Evms-devel] EVMS announcement

[Eff Norwood]

> In summary, we feel that this decision is the best way to support our
> users for the long term. We want to provide EVMS on current and future
> kernels, and we feel this change provides the best method for achieving
> that.

I think the decision not to include EVMS in 2.5 or 2.6 is a very poor one.
The EVMS group has been incredibly responsive and they have developed a very
robust and functional addition to Linux that was long overdue. I think that
*users* and functionality ought to be considered over design considerations
a little more often. If there can be two Intel EtherExpress Pro 100 drivers
(Becker and Intel versions) the precedent has already been set for inclusion
of kernel bits with similar functionality has it not?

A clean and reasonable design now has to be reworked and the results will be
reduced functionality and costs to the user. Costs in installation,
functionality, usability, and manageability. I hope a cutting edge project
like Linux isn't starting to fall prey to the idea that "It's always been
done that way."

I am seriously disappointed.

Eff Norwood