Please clarify the confusion about response to exFAT issue

asked 2014-12-03 23:12:26 +0300

shmerl
9435 ●44 ●70 ●69

updated 2014-12-05 22:22:30 +0300

pulsar
755 ●32 ●53 ●59

The latest response which was somehow supposed to address the issues with exFAT being undesirable to some backers is confusing.

You created a poll about what [free] filesystems to support. I guess it means in addition to what is supported in Sailfish now already. But is that poll still about opinions on exFAT problem, or you are saying that you already decided to make exFAT mandatory in case the stretch goal is reached and further input on that subject is pointless? Please clarify it to avoid mixing two unrelated issues (additional filesystems and keeping exFAT optional / on-demand).

edit retag flag offensive close delete

Comments

A more simple answer might have been nice indeed... Something like "We made a decision, we published it, and now we have to live with this promise already delivered - Sorry for those who didn't like our decision, we'll improve on this. Thanks for all your feedback, it's noted and will be taken into count in our future decisions".

simo ( 2014-12-03 23:42:09 +0300 )edit

sorry? shmerl's question or the poll?

rudi ( 2014-12-03 23:46:56 +0300 )edit

@simo: Yes indeed. Or may be it could be something like: "We'd like to get more input before deciding, to give more chances for bigger number of backers to express what you think about this exFAT issue". Either way, it would have been less confusing than now.

shmerl ( 2014-12-03 23:51:56 +0300 )edit

agree: more information at first - then short and simple answers to vote for
that's what you mean?

rudi ( 2014-12-03 23:56:51 +0300 )edit

Happy to see that after so much discussion here and there about how passionate some of our Community members might feel about exFAT you decided to do the right thing and ask a question to clarify.

I would like to invite you to have a look at the threads histories (one can see the revisions by simply clicking on the upgraded link on the top right of the post below the avatar) on the related posts, or user activities (which is transparently available to any user) and you'll probably also come to realize that the derailing from the original topic is caused by roughly 2 Community members.

So, to clarify once again, the poll is and was always about open source file systems support and as @Stskeeps mentioned:

As a general note: here's the chance to affect something better being supported for open file systems under SailfishOS. Exclude X from device isn't something doing that. Things like, export your files as ext3 over USB, multi-partition support in the device, enablement of swap if existing in file system table, selections in dialogs of ext4/btrfs/ZFS/what do you have, .. even NFS. It's a good time to get creative.

Now, I'm not answering your question, I know, I apologize. I hope the lack of it doesn't fuel any extra confusion and/or frustration.

As TJC admin, I just wanted to say a little thank you for asking the right way and encourage good practices here...

eric ( 2014-12-04 10:56:23 +0300 )edit

answered 2014-12-03 23:25:05 +0300

rudi
1483 ●10 ●24 ●41

updated 2014-12-03 23:34:22 +0300

do you like to have it easy - buy a sd (>32GB) with exFAT insert it into the tablet and pay for the license
do you like to be limited to 32GB
do you like to have more than 32GB without beeing able to use the card in your windows PC/whatever (formatting it ext3/ext4/whatever)

stretch goal seems to mean - buy the license (first point) by default

and - it will be better to ask such question in the poll
https://together.jolla.com/question/68539/poll-file-systems-support-on-sd-card-for-jolla-tablet/
or in the announcement
https://together.jolla.com/question/68538/official-announcement-supporting-larger-microsd-cards-in-the-jolla-tablet-your-input-is-needed/
but better in the poll, to clarify it for everybody

Comments

This was asked in the poll, but apparently was answered rather confusingly as well, so I created a separate thread for more focus and not derailing the poll with meta discussions in case it was intended to be only about free filesystems and not about exFAT.

shmerl ( 2014-12-03 23:48:24 +0300 )edit

Well as far as I have understood it, it is Jolla trying to understand what the best choice is. After all there are many threads on tjc also asking for support of bigger SD cards which implicitly requires exFAT. It is a clear example how it is hard to listen to the community. Jolla acknowledges the demand for big SD, which immediatly then gets attacked due to it most likely meaning paying for exFAT licensing...

Philippe De Swert ( 2014-12-04 01:55:52 +0300 )edit

If it's an open discussion then exFAT issue is included there apparently. That's how I understood it too. So far one practical proposal to handle exFAT itself (which is needed if some user is limited by cameras and etc. which use exFAT) was to make it optional paid feature available on demand. I don't really see any other practical workaround for it.

shmerl ( 2014-12-04 01:59:00 +0300 )edit

it might be hard to understand, but for me it's a big advantage that 'I'm asked. If I don't know an answer, I'll try to find out what it means, or I wait for the answer of the community.

rudi ( 2014-12-04 02:02:24 +0300 )edit

Please clarify the confusion about response to exFAT issue

Comments

1 Answer

Comments

Question tools

Stats

Related questions

Please clarify the confusion about response to exFAT issue

Comments

1 Answer

Comments

Question tools

Public thread

Stats

Related questions