On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 7:26 AM, Atin Mukherjee <amukherj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 7:46 PM, Shyam Ranganathan <srangana@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:On 01/30/2018 02:14 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As release 3.10.10 is tagged and off to packaging, here are the needed
> details for 3.10.11
>
> Release date: 28th Feb, 2018
Checking the 3.10 review backlog, here are a couple of concerns,
1) Reviews,
- https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19081/
- https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19082/
Have been submitted since Jan 9th, but are not passing regressions or
smoke. I rebased them again today, but they still fail.
@Du, can you look at these, as you have backported them.
2) @Hari, https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19553/ seems to be failing
consistently in the test, ./tests/bugs/posix/bug-990028.t please take a
look, as this patch is important from an upgrade perspective.
atin@dhcp35-96:~/codebase/upstream/glusterfs_master/ glusterfs$ git log tests/bugs/posix/bug-990028.t
commit 858fae39936e5aee5ea4e3816a10ba310d04cf61
Author: Amar Tumballi <amarts@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon Nov 27 23:56:50 2017 +0530
tests: mark currently failing regression tests as known issues
Change-Id: If6c36dc6c395730dfb17b5b4df6f24629d904926
BUG: 1517961
Signed-off-by: Amar Tumballi <amarts@xxxxxxxxxx>FWIW, this test is marked as bad in master. Should we mark it bad in release-3.12 as well?
s/release-3.12/release-3.10/g
> Tracker bug for blockers:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=glusterfs-3.10. 11
>
> Shyam
> _______________________________________________ > Gluster-devel mailing list
> Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>
_______________________________________________
maintainers mailing list
maintainers@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
_______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
