>>105762308
thats just like, you're opinion, man.
i don't disagree it should have an altered name to avoid potential confusion from people who expect raid1 to act a certain way, like how zfs uses "raid-z1" instead of "raid5" (though i'm not sure what difference there is between them)
btrfs raid1 has some advantages over traditional raid1, like it can utilise more/all space of differently-sized devices and usable capacity is 1/2 regardless of the number of drives