See golang/go#41190 and the documentation.
Unfortunately, the new package only supports read-only filesystems, so a straight implementation of those interfaces won't necessarily make a lot of sense. However, I think that it does make sense to try to get the interfaces to match those in io/fs as much as possible. For example, Remote should probably implement fs.File, and possibly fs.FS as well. Similarly, while it will probably be a bit more awkward, it would be nice if FileSystem, Attachment, and File got changed to embed fs.FS and fs.File, with additions as necessary. Renaming some of them might make sense, too.
See golang/go#41190 and the documentation.
Unfortunately, the new package only supports read-only filesystems, so a straight implementation of those interfaces won't necessarily make a lot of sense. However, I think that it does make sense to try to get the interfaces to match those in
io/fsas much as possible. For example,Remoteshould probably implementfs.File, and possiblyfs.FSas well. Similarly, while it will probably be a bit more awkward, it would be nice ifFileSystem,Attachment, andFilegot changed to embedfs.FSandfs.File, with additions as necessary. Renaming some of them might make sense, too.