[Gluster-devel] 3.6 Feature Freeze - move to mid next week?
Anders Blomdell
anders.blomdell at control.lth.se
Fri Jul 4 15:21:27 UTC 2014
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 2014-07-04 17:14, Jeff Darcy wrote:
>> Given the holiday weekend in US, I feel that it would be appropriate
>> to move the 3.6 feature freeze date to mid next week so that we can
>> have more reviews done & address review comments too. We can still
>> continue to track other milestones as per our release schedule [1].
>> What do you folks think?
>
> I think the answer depends on what we can expect to change between now
> and then. Since the gluster.org feature page never got updated to
> reflect the real feature set for 3.6, I took the list from email sent
> after the planning meeting.
>
> * Better SSL
> Two out of three patches merged, one still in review.
>
> * Data Classification
> Design barely begun.
>
> * Heterogeneous Bricks
> Patch has CR+1 V+1 but still stalled in review.
>
> * Trash
> Ancient one is still there, probably doesn't even work.
>
> * Disperse
> Patches still in very active review.
>
> * Persistent AFR Changelog Xattributes
> Patches merged.
>
> * Better Peer Identification
> Patch still in review (fails verification).
>
> * Gluster Volume Snapshot
> Tons of patches merged, tons more still to come.
>
> * AFRv2
> Jammed in long ago.
>
> * Policy Based Split-Brain Resolver (PBSBR)
> No patches, feature page still says in design.
>
> * RDMA Improvements
> No patches, feature page says work in progress.
>
> * Server-side Barrier Feature
> Patches merged.
>
>
> That leaves us with a very short list of items that are likely to change
> state.
>
> * Better SSL
>
> * Heterogeneous Bricks
>
> * Disperse
>
> * Better Peer Identification
>
> Of those, I think only disperse is likely to benefit from an extension.
> The others just need people to step up and finish reviewing them, which
> could happen today if there were sufficient will. The real question is
> what to do about disperse. Some might argue that it's already complete
> enough to go in, so long as its limitations are documented
> appropriately. Others might argue that it's still months away from
> being usable (especially wrt performance). In a way it doesn't matter,
> because either way a few days won't make a difference. We just need to
> make a collective decision based on its current state (or close to it).
> If we need to wait a few days before people can come together for that,
> so be it.
OK, this probably answered my earlier question, since there is no IPv6 on
this list (stated somewhere to depend on 'Better Peer Identification'),
i.e. I should stick to 3.5.1 and only apply patches to address my needs
and then check what needs to be done when 3.6.0 is out.
/Anders
- --
Anders Blomdell Email: anders.blomdell at control.lth.se
Department of Automatic Control
Lund University Phone: +46 46 222 4625
P.O. Box 118 Fax: +46 46 138118
SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTtsZ3AAoJENZYyvaDG8NcJPMH/j1P/DN4lerQHtxOLjS7b6MM
dNw12blXOIioFbGv/Sh7EYQm5A0Db4Hk21ngIYQcrZVgab/rVv6pfqvpV97S74sE
A1yzTfJSMtshSter4F4VSV7BZrPHq7+hYKEkTNEu4Ugw7+PcGvjMAhfVmgiVqUT4
xTqSzB3IsOPELXIOrlB6AZbA7037UvWyyhxjilH5IRVW8KB2ButP2baP0zXlXMf6
622mn3CK11mp/VrXHyxBgGXUMWpJQ9r1vLEn4COhqhALQJ+0vW8uayzcYMYWz56m
etTJKtGTZtPalrt1XrFq2Ny5o1KsG4GXlRIGwoqIHtn2v71Sserl6CZQRA+AVAo=
=/oBv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Gluster-devel
mailing list