From: Christopher J. Morrone <morrone2@llnl.gov>
To: lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org
Subject: [lustre-devel] DNE2 feature patch landing
Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2015 13:58:11 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5595A5E3.2060201@llnl.gov> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aefb17439e2d4164b318a5e05c8695c0@EXCHCS32.ornl.gov>
On 07/02/2015 01:46 PM, Simmons, James A. wrote:
>> All,
>>
>> Last week a patch landed conflicting with the DNE2 project that was
>> preparing to land for 2.8:
>> http://wiki.lustre.org/Projects
>>
>> The DNE2 feature patches were rapidly re-based, re-reviewed and prepared
>> again for landing. However, a unrelated test failure from the continuous
>> integration environment has delayed the landing of these three patches
>> beyond the feature freeze date of June 30th.
>>
>> We anticipate that it would only take an extra day or two to get the
>> outstanding DNE2 patches landed and recommend that we extend the feature
>> freeze for these to allow this OpenSFS-funded project to complete. We
>> do not expect this to have a material affect on the 2.8 release date.
>>
>> I'm asking the list now for a couple of supporting community voices to
>> endorse this request.
>
> We had this discussion at the last OpenSFS working group which we agreed
> that the patch for LU-3534 should land after the feature freeze. Before the
> merge conflict the patch did pass all maloo test and had the needed reviews.
> The merge conflict was due to another change that landed that altered one
> of the test in the test suite. So their is no C code change between versions of
> the LU-3534 patch. The rest of the patches are fixes for bug so they fall into
> the bug fixing phase.
On the contract call today we encouraged Intel to have this conversation
and make this decision more publicly. The LWG calls are only attended
by a small fraction of the development community. I think it is
important that we start being more open and transparent with the
activities and decisions surrounding Lustre's master branch.
So thanks, Richard for posting on lustre-devel.
Since this feature has been developed under the old style of piecemeal
landing rather than the new topic branch development style, I too agree
that landing this after the feature freeze date is acceptable.
Chris
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-02 20:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-02 19:25 [lustre-devel] DNE2 feature patch landing Henwood, Richard
2015-07-02 19:36 ` Patrick Farrell
2015-07-02 20:46 ` Simmons, James A.
2015-07-02 20:58 ` Christopher J. Morrone [this message]
2015-07-06 14:46 ` Henwood, Richard
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5595A5E3.2060201@llnl.gov \
--to=morrone2@llnl.gov \
--cc=lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.