Re: hammer branch for v0.94.2 ready for QE

[Loic Dachary <loic@dachary.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2486 bytes --]

Hi Yuri,

If I'm not mistaken http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11660 is the last issue blocking v0.94.2. Is there another one I don't see ?

Cheers

On 26/05/2015 18:13, Yuri Weinstein wrote:
> Loic
> 
> This hammer release QE validation is taking unusually long time and has issues that has to be clarified. 
> 
> All test results were summarized in http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11492
> 
> There are several reasons contributing to slowness of this validation, product related as well as infrastructure related, also high amount of tests make turn around time slower as well.
> 
> I think some suites, e.g. rados and upgrades for example will have to be re-run after issues had been clarified/fixed.
> 
> rados, krbd, knfs, samba suite test results need reviews by the team leads.
> 
> Thx
> YuriW
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Loic Dachary" <loic@dachary.org>
> To: "Yuri Weinstein" <yweinste@redhat.com>
> Cc: "Ceph Development" <ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org>, "Abhishek L" <abhishek.lekshmanan@gmail.com>
> Sent: Monday, May 18, 2015 5:42:12 AM
> Subject: hammer branch for v0.94.2 ready for QE
> 
> Hi Yuri,
> 
> The hammer branch for v0.94.2 as found at https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commits/hammer has been approved by Greg, Yehuda, Josh and Sam and is ready for QE. For the record, the head is https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commit/63832d4039889b6b704b88b86eaba4aadcfceb2e and the details of the tests run are at http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11492
> 
> Note that it has two more commits compared to what you tested before:
> 
> https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commit/293affe992118ed6e04f685030b2d83a794ca624 fixing http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11622
> https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commit/a43d24861089a02f3b42061e482e05016a0021f6 fixing http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11604
> 
> which address two blockers that you listed at http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11492#QE-Validation
> 
> These two new commits only have influence, directly or indirectly, on rgw. They do not require or deserve a new run of the rados, fs or rbd suite because none of them depend on rgw, directly or indirectly.
> 
> The other two issues listed as blockers are
> 
> http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11613#note-4 do not need a backport to hammer
> http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11591 is a teuthology related issue that can be worked around and does not need to be a blocker for hammer
> 
> Cheers
> 

-- 
Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]