[Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Release 4.0: Branched

[Raghavendra G]

On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 4:49 PM, Raghavendra Gowdappa <rgowdapp at redhat.com>
wrote:

>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Shyam Ranganathan" <srangana at redhat.com>
> > To: "Gluster Devel" <gluster-devel at gluster.org>, "GlusterFS
> Maintainers" <maintainers at gluster.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2018 9:49:51 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Gluster-Maintainers] [Gluster-devel] Release 4.0: Branched
> >
> > On 01/23/2018 03:17 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote:
> > > 4.0 release has been branched!
> > >
> > > I will follow this up with a more detailed schedule for the release,
> and
> > > also the granted feature backport exceptions that we are waiting.
> > >
> > > Feature backports would need to make it in by this weekend, so that we
> > > can tag RC0 by the end of the month.
> >
> > Backports need to be ready for merge on or before Jan, 29th 2018 3:00 PM
> > Eastern TZ.
> >
> > Features that requested and hence are granted backport exceptions are as
> > follows,
> >
> > 1) Dentry fop serializer xlator on brick stack
> > https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/397
> >
> > @Du please backport the same to the 4.0 branch as the patch in master is
> > merged.
>
> Sure.
>

https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19340/1
But this might fail smoke as the bug associated is not associated with 4.0
branch. Blocked on 4.0 version tag in bugzilla.


> >
> > 2) Leases support on GlusterFS
> > https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/350
> >
> > @Jiffin and @ndevos, there is one patch pending against master,
> > https://review.gluster.org/#/c/18785/ please do the needful and backport
> > this to the 4.0 branch.
> >
> > 3) Data corruption in write ordering of rebalance and application writes
> > https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/308
> >
> > @susant, @du if we can conclude on the strategy here, please backport as
> > needed.
>
> https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19207/
> Review comments need to be addressed and centos regressions are failing.
>
> https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19202/
> There are some suggestions on the patch. If others agree they are valid,
> this patch can be considered as redundant with approach of #19207. However,
> as I've mentioned in the comments there are some tradeoffs too. So, Waiting
> for response to my comments. If nobody responds in the time period given,
> we can merge the patch and susant will have to backport to 4.0 branch.
>
> >
> > 4) Couple of patches that are tracked for a backport are,
> > https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19223/
> > https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19267/ (prep for ctime changes in later
> > releases)
> >
> > Other features discussed are not in scope for a backports to 4.0.
> >
> > If you asked for one and do not see it in this list, shout out!
> >
> > >
> > > Only exception could be: https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19223/
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Shyam
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Gluster-devel mailing list
> > > Gluster-devel at gluster.org
> > > http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > maintainers mailing list
> > maintainers at gluster.org
> > http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-devel mailing list
> Gluster-devel at gluster.org
> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>



-- 
Raghavendra G
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-devel/attachments/20180126/e22fc95f/attachment-0001.html>