From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Loic Dachary Subject: Re: upcoming release giant v0.87.1 : leads feedback needed Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 21:34:38 +0100 Message-ID: <54B975DE.3020504@dachary.org> References: <54B7E6DC.8010905@dachary.org> <54B7F2DF.9060003@dachary.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Q2eOpFDwnW5WMget6mIdmRPDWogQbQG9c" Return-path: Received: from mail2.dachary.org ([91.121.57.175]:42047 "EHLO smtp.dmail.dachary.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752484AbbAPUek (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Jan 2015 15:34:40 -0500 Received: from [10.9.0.6] (unknown [10.0.2.28]) by smtp.dmail.dachary.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C40B342B4C for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2015 21:34:38 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <54B7F2DF.9060003@dachary.org> Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Ceph Development This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --Q2eOpFDwnW5WMget6mIdmRPDWogQbQG9c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Again, As it turns out we're going to have giant point releases after all. In a = nutshell there is going to be one or two point release for giant, until H= ammer is out. The backporting activity for giant will be lower than for f= irefly or hammer, because the idea is to focus on backporting every other= release (i.e. dumpling, firefly, hammer, etc. ).=20 My initial request is therefore resumed and the ticket open again. Thanks for your patience and sorry for the confusion :-) On 15/01/2015 18:03, Loic Dachary wrote: > Hi Again, >=20 > Well, this is a little embarassing but here it is : there won't be a po= int release for giant. I'll update the redmine tickets to remove the "gia= nt" backport targets as well as the github milestone list accordingly. >=20 > Sorry for the noise. >=20 > On 15/01/2015 17:12, Loic Dachary wrote: >> Hi Ceph, >> >> The https://github.com/ceph/ceph/tree/giant-backports branch was teste= d with the rgw, rados and rbd suites. The results of each suite have been= analyzed and summarized in http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10501. The nex= t steps are either: >> >> a) Yehuda for rgw, Josh for rbd and Sam for rados all agree that the e= rrors are unrelated to the backports >> b) The https://github.com/ceph/ceph/tree/giant-backports branch is giv= en to QE for final tests and merge into giant >> >> OR >> >> a) At least of the lead thinks more work is needed to stabilize the gi= ant branch >> b) A new set of tests will be run and analyzed after adding/removing o= ne or more backports to/from the https://github.com/ceph/ceph/tree/giant-= backports branch >> >> The description of http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10501 shows a detail= ed list of all commits / issues that are in the giant backport branch. To= get a global view of what the next giant point release will be, the desc= ription also includes the commits that have already been merged in the gi= ant branch. The list of pull requests that are candidate for inclusion in= the giant release but have not been included in the integration branch a= re also listed: maybe one of them could contribute to resolve a problem f= ound during the tests. And finally all redmine issues that have been mark= ed to be backported to giant but do not yet have a candidate pull request= are listed: this is the backport backlog so to speak ;-) >> >> Cheers >> >=20 --=20 Lo=C3=AFc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre --Q2eOpFDwnW5WMget6mIdmRPDWogQbQG9c Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlS5dd4ACgkQ8dLMyEl6F20qRwCfUE/GeHcb8RCScEa1A/lGwBG+ exsAoKPpSzbjS18nb+WBZaIMKQLdaKpf =1oEj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Q2eOpFDwnW5WMget6mIdmRPDWogQbQG9c--