[Gluster-users] [Gluster-devel] Announcing release 3.11 : Scope, schedule and feature tracking

[Shyam]

On 04/17/2017 05:56 AM, Poornima Gurusiddaiah wrote:
>> Further to the above, we are also considering the following features for
>> this release, request feature owners to let us know if these are
>> actively being worked on and if these will make the branching dates.
>> (calling out folks that I think are the current feature owners for the same)
>>
>> 1) Halo - Initial Cut (@pranith)
>> 2) IPv6 support (@kaushal)
>> 3) Negative lookup (@poornima)
>
> Issue: https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/82
> Bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1442569
> Patch: https://review.gluster.org/#/c/16952/
> This feature is targeted for 3.11 as an experimental feature and mostly for
> SMB users only.

Added to the 3.11 board.

>
>> 4) Parallel Readdirp - More changes to default settings. (@poornima, @du)
> I think we should let it be optional for another release,
> until it stabilizes. However, for this release we would like to make it
> production feature (not experimental). I have raised the issue for
> the same: https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/166

Added some queries on the github issue, to understand the work, and we 
can target it for the release accordingly.

>
> Also for 3.11, one more item would be to make the md-cache improvements
> production feature, it is experimental currently. Issue for the same:
> https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/167

Same as above.

>
> Will add the release notes for all these features in the issues. I do not have
> permissions to add labels though.

Release notes for 3.11 will be drafted post branching, at which point a 
request to all will be posted to update the same. Please update the 
same, using a review via gerrit, referencing your github issue #.

Release notes are part of the glusterfs repository, hence updates to the 
same are like doc/code changes to the repository, hence require a 
submission via gerrit and not updates to the github issue. Hope this is 
clear, else please ask for more clarifications.

>
> Thanks,
> Poornima
>>