Upcoming filesystems - please, 4Sparky, too!

[Yoogle]

I just wonder recognizing not a single guy having recently complained according to this matter, at least as of 2016's technical standard! I'm reporting these sorrows of mine here because of some hope Sparky developers' iron hearts will get softened a bit:
Today, on more and more linux distros there isn't any problem to have root installing on a btrfs or xfs partition evenly without another slice spent as legacy_boot. Seeing so I succeeded on Debian from v.8 on, too (although that org has a warning of)! Meantime, I caught a lot of practice in trying out many linux systems. Oh yes, a sea of problems has swept upon me - but never because of btrfs or XFS both I like very much! Even ZFS has revealed itself an as truthworth as mighty instrument on linux, too.
The thing is, I like Sparky same-same those file systems, for strongly suggesting it's the very best Debian follower ever seen (and Debian, as is my trusty meaning, represents the very best Linux line)! WHY THE HELL, however, the Sparky installer is made so heavily trying to hinder all users prefering to explore the root use of file systems other than ext4?
At the edge: Recently, I've been successful on installing zfsonlinux on Sparky, and it works well, although Synaptic doesn't stop shouting from protest ...
So please, masters, work on several file systems usability on Sparky! :-\

[dhinds]

Ten months after your post I decided to reinstall sparky multimedia (w/ openbox rather than a desktop environment) on two 50 Gb XFS partitions for root and home (and another in the middle for enlarging either or both, since XFS lacks the ability to shrink but can be grown).

I had no problem creating and installing to those partitions using a live 5.2. Sparky multimedia session (although I had to install xfsprogs and xfsdump with synaptic first, which was no problem since all those tools are provided).

I could have done the same with brtfs (but decided to go with xfs).  You could have too.