On 07/02/2015 12:16 AM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote: > Hi, > Am 01.07.2015 um 23:35 schrieb Loic Dachary: >> Hi, >> >> The details of the differences between the Hammer point releases and the RedHat Ceph Storage 1.3 can be listed as described at >> >> http://www.spinics.net/lists/ceph-devel/msg24489.html reconciliation between hammer and v0.94.1.2 >> >> The same analysis should be done for https://github.com/ceph/ceph/releases/tag/v0.94.1.3 which presumably matches RedHat Ceph Storage 1.3. > > can you clarify this? In the past the ceph inktank releases were exactly > based on git tags. Is there now a "hidden" git repo for the ceph > releases done by redhat? Or how can we understand this? > - The git repo for RHCS is "hidden" in the sense that the authoritative Git repository for the code in the RHCS product does reside behind our corporate firewall, so users can't clone it directly. - The patches themselves that we apply on top of upstream are not "hidden", in the sense that you can download the SRPM from http://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/7Server/en/RHCEPH/SRPMS/ and unpack to see what is in it yourself. Every binary package that Red Hat publishes as part of the downstream RHCS product is represented by those SRPMs. This will always be the case - Ceph is LGPL so Red Hat is under obligation to publish the source for anything we distribute to customers. - Additionally, I have been pushing our changes to GitHub in the form of "rhcs" branches. One of the reasons I do this is that it's a little easier to coordinate with Loic and the rest of the developers when dealing with Git directly. I can't promise that this is going to continue forever if we switch to some other method of patch management or something, but it just happens to be the most convenient option for now :) - Ken _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |