linux-xfs.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: "Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz" <arekm@maven.pl>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: xfsprogs 3.1.12 and 3.2.0 releases?
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 10:02:59 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140120230259.GM18112@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201401202342.54755.arekm@maven.pl>

On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 11:42:54PM +0100, Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz wrote:
> On Monday 20 of January 2014, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 06:22:48PM +0100, Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz wrote:
> > > Hello.
> > > 
> > > What's needed for both 3.1.12 and 3.2.0 releases to happen?
> > > 
> > > If 3.2.0 is to be released soon then nice. Dave, AFAIK it is waiting for
> > > you and xfs_db crc work only?
> > 
> > xfs_repair work, actually. xfs_db is pretty much complete.
> 
> [...]
> 
> > > Obviously I hope 3.2.0 is soon and there is no need to waste effort on
> > > 3.1.x.
> > 
> > The problem for me right now is that there are only so many hours in
> > the day....
> 
> Could 3.2.0 be released without full xfs_db crc support then? And defer xfs_db 
> to 3.2.1 or even later. Especially you say "xfs_db is pretty much complete".

* release without full /xfs_repair/ support, not xfs_db.

No, I don't think so. releasing without full xfs_db support isn't an
issue as it's not critical to users. OTOH, xfs_repair is critical to
users.

> Right now we have a situation where some features exist in kernel (as stable 
> feature - separate project quota) that are not supported by userspace.

Separate project quota is v5 superblocks only, which are still
marked EXPERIMENTAL. For everything non-v5 superblock, v3.1.11 works
fine (modulo bugs). 

> Some 
> fixes (growfs thing/superblock garbage) missing etc. Improvements 
> (performance/paralellism) waiting.

Nobody is going to push new features back to 3.1.x - we don't have
neough developer resources available to do that sort of work. That's
pretty obvious, given we are even having this conversation.

> ps. I assume that someone else does the actual release, so no need for more 
> hours/day for you in such case.

Well, that's always been the plan since a 3.1.12 release was
proposed 3 months ago. How well has that plan been working out so
far?

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

  reply	other threads:[~2014-01-20 23:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-01-20 17:22 xfsprogs 3.1.12 and 3.2.0 releases? Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz
2014-01-20 22:30 ` Dave Chinner
2014-01-20 22:42   ` Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz
2014-01-20 23:02     ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2014-01-20 23:08       ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-01-20 23:11         ` Ben Myers
2014-01-21  8:17           ` Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz
2014-01-21 23:41             ` Dave Chinner
2014-01-22 14:38               ` Mark Tinguely
2014-01-22 14:54                 ` Mark Tinguely
2014-01-22 14:48               ` Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz
2014-01-22 23:03                 ` Dave Chinner
2014-01-23 22:37                   ` Rich Johnston
2014-01-21  8:22           ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-01-27 18:46 ` [ANNOUNCE] xfsprogs for-3.1.12 branch has been updated to 40c65a7 Rich Johnston
2014-01-28  4:20   ` Dave Chinner
2014-01-28 15:36     ` Rich Johnston
2014-01-28 16:54       ` Ben Myers
2014-01-28 20:17       ` Dave Chinner
2014-01-28  4:42   ` Dave Chinner
2014-01-28 15:33     ` Rich Johnston
2014-01-28 20:15       ` Dave Chinner
2014-01-28 17:29     ` Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz
2014-01-30 19:20       ` Rich Johnston
2014-01-30 20:20         ` Eric Sandeen
2014-01-30 20:58           ` Rich Johnston
2014-02-19 19:18   ` Rich Johnston
2014-02-19 21:50     ` Dave Chinner
2014-03-14 15:28       ` Rich Johnston
2014-04-07 18:20 ` xfsprogs 3.1.12 and 3.2.0 releases? Rich Johnston
2014-04-07 23:30   ` Dave Chinner
2014-04-08 12:38     ` Rich Johnston

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=20140120230259.GM18112@dastard \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=arekm@maven.pl \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).