From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay2.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.29]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4E487F3F for ; Tue, 15 Oct 2013 17:59:39 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B477A304039 for ; Tue, 15 Oct 2013 15:59:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sandeen.net (sandeen.net [63.231.237.45]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id FcCZELePVrBsChSP for ; Tue, 15 Oct 2013 15:59:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <525DC8D3.5070008@sandeen.net> Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 17:59:31 -0500 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: projid32bit=1 default in xfsprogs-3.2.0 References: <525C1C15.7020204@sandeen.net> <20131014211659.GI5663@dastard> <20131014212347.GB1935@sgi.com> <525C6108.6010108@sandeen.net> <20131015194609.GC32095@infradead.org> <20131015204342.GA24997@infradead.org> <20131015212214.GC1935@sgi.com> <20131015213110.GA5895@infradead.org> <20131015214910.GX10553@sgi.com> <525DBA50.5000202@sandeen.net> <20131015224831.GZ4446@dastard> In-Reply-To: <20131015224831.GZ4446@dastard> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Dave Chinner Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Ben Myers , xfs-oss On 10/15/13 5:48 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 04:57:36PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> On 10/15/13 4:49 PM, Ben Myers wrote: >>> Hey, >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 02:31:10PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >>>> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 04:22:14PM -0500, Ben Myers wrote: >>>>> The tags are out there: >>>>> http://oss.sgi.com/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=xfs/cmds/xfsprogs.git;a=tags >>>> >>>> I managed to somehow miss them. Sorry! >>> >>> np >>> >>>>> That's an interesting idea. We hadn't discussed a 3.1.12 release. No >>>>> particular objection to doing that, it's just that we didn't branch for the >>>>> v3.0.5->v3.1.0 set of releases. Maybe it is better if we all focus on 3.2.0. >>>> >>>> With git you can easily branch from a past commit, e.g.: >>>> >>>> hch@brick:~/work/xfsprogs$ git checkout -b release-3.1 v3.1.11 >>>> Switched to a new branch 'release-3.1' >>> >>> Yep. If folks want a 3.1.12 we should certainly kick the idea around a bit. >>> I'm just guessing that most would prefer to focus on a 3.2.0 in the near term. >>> Maybe I'm mistaken about that though. ;) >> >> I'm not super keen to divide the focus; I've already updated the distros I >> care about to 3.2.0-alpha1, so I wouldn't go backwards to a 3.1.12. > > I'd prefer we focus on getting stuff reviewed and integrated into > 3.2.0 more quickly than we are now. At this point in the cycle, we > really need the 3.2 branch and xfstests to be updated daily with the > changes that were reviewed in the past 24 hours so that we can > iterate test cycles with the latest fixes more easily. Agreed, I'm sitting on things that I don't know if I need to resend or not. I've offered it before, and I'll offer again: if it's a burden for SGI to keep up with xfstests merging, we can help - but the delays are getting to be problematic again in the current process. Thanks, -Eric > This will give us a clearer idea of the problems we still need to > fix before the release can progress without everyone having to keep > their own private trees up to date with what everyone else is > changing/fixing... > > Cheers, > > Dave. > _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs