On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 04:06:58PM -0400, Shyam wrote: > Hi, > > Prepare for a lengthy mail, but needed for the 3.12 release branching, so > here is a key to aid the impatient, > > Key: > 1) If you asked for an exception to a feature (meaning delayed backport to > 3.12 branch post branching for the release) see "Section 1" > - Handy list of nick's that maybe interested in this: > - @pranithk, @sunilheggodu, @aspandey, @amarts, @kalebskeithley, @kshlm > (IPv6), @jdarcy (Halo Hybrid) > > 2) If you have/had a feature targeted for 3.12 and have some code posted > against the same, look at "Section 2" AND we want to hear back from you! > - Handy list of nick's that should be interested in this: > - @csabahenk, @nixpanic, @aravindavk, @amarts, @kotreshhr, @soumyakoduri > > 3) If you have/had a feature targeted for 3.12 and have posted no code > against the same yet, see "Section 3", your feature is being dropped from > the release. > - Handy list of nick's that maybe interested in this: > - @sanoj-unnikrishnan, @aravindavk, @kotreshhr, @amarts, @jdarcy, @avra > (people who filed the issue) > > 4) Finally, if you do not have any features for the release pending, please > help others out reviewing what is still pending, here [1] is a quick link to > those reviews. > > Sections: .. > ******Section 2:****** > Issues needing some further clarity: (Total: 6) > Reason: > - There are issues here, for which code is already merged (or submitted) > and issue is still open. This is the right state for an issue to be in this > stage of the release, as documentation or release-notes would possibly be > still pending, which will finally close the issue (or rather mark it fixed) > - BUT, without a call out from the contributors that required code is > already merged in, it is difficult to assess if the issue should qualify for > the release > > Issue list: .. > - Decide what to do with glfs_ipc() in libgfapi > - https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/269 > - @nixpanic I assume there is more than just test case disabling for this, > is this expected to happen by 3.12? https://review.gluster.org/17854 has been posted against the master branch. Once it is merged, it should be backported to the release-3.12 branch. This also makes it unnecessary to revert/fixup the glfs_ipc() function that has symbol version 4.0. Thanks, Niels
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
