>First, a filesystem should generally be stable enough that patches applied by a distro don't completely ruin it. File systems are sufficiently complicated onl

>First, a filesystem should generally be stable enough that patches applied by a distro don't completely ruin it. File systems are sufficiently complicated only developers with expertise in a particular file system will be applying patches. Red Hat has device-mapper, LVM, ext4 and XFS developers with such expertise, but not Btrfs developers. That's the reason why they dropped it. > it implies lack of testing efforts even for Centos & Fedora users I can't parse that. > And finally, I simply don't want bugs in my root filesystem This is both naive and a reasonable request. It's naive in that they all have bugs, users find them, they report them, they get fixed. Happens all the time. It's also reasonable to pick a file system you think will have the least problems for your use case, if you're not interested in being a bug reporter.