Please provide some substance to the claims made in the README
Created by: Licenser
The promise made in the README is exciting however at the end it leaves a bit of an empty feeling.
In the end, for a technical audience, it shoulds a lot like marketing and has the bad aftertaste of the btrfs disaster.
Between all the claims made of capabilities of TFS none seems to be backed up by research, or studies, or benchmarks, or really anything.
Comparisons with other filesystems seem to lack research on the topic and instead of actually comparing them are stated as broad groupings "some other", "few filesystems".
Estimates are presented without any base on what they are based on, not to mention example cases that would back them up. (i.e. "It is estimated that you get 60-120% more usable space.")
Parts are worded misleadingly and could easily be misinterpreted to mean more than they actually do (i.e. "TFS stores a revision history of every file without imposing extra overhead" which I suspect means overhead beyond the delta as there needs to be overhead compared to the un-revisioned file).
All memory safe is outright false and self-contradicting in the explanation.
All this seems to hurt the credibility of the implementation especially when the claim is that "many components are complete" at which point it seems sensible to expect some backing of the claims based on actual data.