- Wednesday, December 9, 2015

release-team@conference.openafs.org

Wednesday, December 9, 2015< ^ >

Room Configuration

Room Occupants

GMT+0
[00:38:54] mvita joins the room
[02:40:45] shadow@gmail.com/barnowlABEE2063 leaves the room
[02:40:55] shadow@gmail.com/barnowlABEE2063 joins the room
[03:27:48] shadow@gmail.com/barnowlABEE2063 leaves the room
[03:27:57] shadow@gmail.com/barnowlABEE2063 joins the room
[03:32:40] Jeffrey Altman leaves the room
[03:33:11] shadow@gmail.com/barnowlABEE2063 leaves the room
[03:33:22] shadow@gmail.com/barnowlABEE2063 joins the room
[03:41:35] Jeffrey Altman joins the room
[03:47:42] Jeffrey Altman leaves the room
[04:52:16] Jeffrey Altman joins the room
[07:50:35] kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowlB2515201 leaves the room
[07:50:47] kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowlB2515201 joins the room
[10:00:02] Jeffrey Altman leaves the room
[10:00:47] Jeffrey Altman joins the room
[10:18:16] shadow@gmail.com/barnowlABEE2063 leaves the room
[10:18:28] shadow@gmail.com/barnowlABEE2063 joins the room
[10:28:31] shadow@gmail.com/barnowlABEE2063 leaves the room
[10:28:44] shadow@gmail.com/barnowlABEE2063 joins the room
[10:52:34] mvita leaves the room
[14:18:03] mvita joins the room
[14:26:53] wiesand joins the room
[14:52:09] meffie joins the room
[15:00:10] <wiesand> Hello
[15:00:33] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowlB2515201> Whoops, I'm getting triplicate.  Back in a moment...
[15:00:38] <mvita> hi Stephan
[15:00:41] kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowlB2515201 leaves the room
[15:00:58] <Jeffrey Altman> I am driving to Pittsburgh.   Linux 4.4 is still broken.   No patches as yet.
[15:00:58] kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowlB2515201 leaves the room
[15:00:58] kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowlB2515201 leaves the room
[15:01:15] <wiesand> Jeff: Thanks.
[15:01:24] kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402 joins the room
[15:01:38] <wiesand> You’re not chatting while steering a car, are you?
[15:01:51] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402> Who, me?
[15:02:00] <wiesand> No, Jeffrey.
[15:02:24] <wiesand> But I’d be just as worried about you ;-)
[15:02:39] <wiesand> Ok, on to "1.6.16" then.
[15:02:50] <wiesand> Any results from testing?
[15:03:29] <mvita> nothing here - no problems in very limited messing about
[15:03:29] <wiesand> I’ll take the silence as a 'no'.
[15:03:32] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402> I don't have any.
[15:04:00] <wiesand> My smoke tests are obviously ok.
[15:04:25] <wiesand> I guess we won’t get much more. How about releasing 1.6.16 next week, during the meeting?
[15:04:52] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402> Seems plausible here.
[15:05:09] <mvita> that sounds fine
[15:05:10] <meffie> no test reports (i've asked for them)
[15:05:26] <wiesand> Mike: Thanks.
[15:05:45] <wiesand> So let’s make it next Wednesday, unless we do get negative reports.
[15:05:50] <meffie> ok
[15:06:07] <wiesand> I merged those two simple manpage fixes.
[15:06:28] <meffie> thank you!
[15:06:31] <wiesand> I think 12128 could still go in.
[15:07:08] <meffie> yes
[15:07:08] <wiesand> ( I actually tested it).
[15:07:18] <meffie> nice :)
[15:07:43] <wiesand> Still hacky, but a lot more friendly to those still using kpasswd.
[15:08:30] <wiesand> How about gtx (12125)? Is that zero risk, or should we wait for 1.6.17?
[15:08:46] <wiesand> And the same question for 12124
[15:09:12] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402> 12125 is ... if not zero-risk, epsilon-risk.
[15:09:33] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402> Same for 12124, I think.
[15:09:37] <meffie> i think 12125 is fine, low risk and fixes a build problem
[15:10:09] <wiesand> I’ll merge 12125 unless it breaks scout/afsmonitor on EL5/6/7 ;-)
[15:10:25] <meffie> ok
[15:10:51] <wiesand> I’m less sure about the syscall file. What could possibly break if we overlook something?
[15:10:57] <meffie> i've not tested with 12124, but it makes sense.
[15:11:46] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402> All pioctls go through the same ioctl path on that file; if we broke
it you wouldn't be able to get tokens or run ~any 'fs' command.
[15:12:39] <wiesand> Sounds good.
[15:13:31] <wiesand> And I think that should be it for 1.6.16.
[15:14:53] <wiesand> I looked at pulling up 11817, but am not familiar enough with that cmd thing.
[15:15:38] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402> Er, 11817 is doc-only?
[15:16:09] <wiesand> Right....
[15:16:59] <wiesand> It was 11814
[15:17:15] <meffie> oh, yes. this just removes a cut-and-paste bug.
[15:18:08] <wiesand> Maybe a candidate for 1.6.17 too. Probably not that important though.
[15:18:20] <meffie> it can wait, if you like.
[15:18:30] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402> Probably not that important, yeah.
[15:18:48] <meffie> (no one is asking for it, i just fixed it during the externalize-log-rotate work)
[15:19:06] <wiesand> I like fixes ;-)
[15:19:26] <meffie> they are better than bugs. :)
[15:19:44] <wiesand> But at this point I’d like to close the bag for 1.6.16.
[15:20:09] <meffie> yes
[15:20:15] <wiesand> Anyway, we already have a nice list of things ready for 1.6.17, and more waiting on master and likely to be ready soon.
[15:20:36] <wiesand> So, on to "1.8" ?
[15:21:03] <meffie> hopefully the shake-loose-vcaches fix can be ready for 1.6.17
[15:21:05] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402> Erm, let me pull up a few notes...
[15:21:39] <wiesand> Mike: yes that would be nice.
[15:22:22] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402> meffie: in 11994, I'm still confused about the make dependency on
procmgmt_softsig.h
[15:23:04] <meffie> looking...
[15:23:37] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402> (comment on patchset 1)
[15:23:43] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402> (inline, even)
[15:25:09] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402> I attempted to ask Andrew to look at 11654 again, since I am not as
expert on that area as I would like.
But, perhaps we will need to just merge it with the current level of
review.
[15:25:43] <meffie> ok i see your question, hmm. i'll take a look.
[15:27:16] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402> Other master/1.8 news: I have had 11835 sitting in gerrit for ages as
a reminder that there is an issue that needs addressing before we lock
in the struct rx_opaque ABI with a new release.  The "right fix"
involved rxgen changes that I wasn't prepared to dig into at the time,
but I was able to convince Chas to take a look, so that's in the
'rxgen-size-t-workaround' topic; please review if you get a chance.
[15:28:16] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402> I guess, back to 11654, does anyone else want to review it or have
lingering doubts, before we merge it?
[15:28:29] <meffie> i got an out-of-band +1 on 11654 from another person. i asked them to put comments in gerrit for us. (i think they were working on getting a new openid provider.)
[15:28:39] <mvita> I'm willing to look at it
[15:28:58] <mvita> I was waiting for the dust to settle
[15:29:21] <mvita> oh, wait, I already did for 8
[15:29:30] <mvita> I'll look at 9
[15:29:59] <meffie> 9 does not mess with the loop limit.
[15:30:22] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402> And, of course, in general a search for "NOT CodeReview=-1
status:open NOT CodeReview=-2 branch:master NOT message:windows NOT
CodeReview=2 project:openafs" finds many things with no
positive/negative review.
[15:30:54] <mvita> sorry, I've gotta go
[15:31:18] <wiesand> Bye Mark. Thanks.
[15:31:30] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402> Bye Mark
[15:32:34] <meffie> thanks, bye.
[15:33:21] <wiesand> Anything else to discuss today?
[15:33:39] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402> Maybe one of the SNA folks could ask Perry what plans exist for
revised versions of 11244 and 11855 (both -1'd)
[15:34:19] <meffie> i'll take a look, perry is doing mainframe stuff these days.
[15:34:20] <wiesand> Probably none...
[15:35:01] <wiesand> BTW Ben, could you abandon 11657?
[15:35:16] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402> Also, RT 131903 reminds me that (IIRC) someone wanted us to pull in
some new autoconf bits to recognize newer arm64 (?) platforms.
I don't know that anyone has volunteered to do so yet.
[15:36:10] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402> 11657 abandoned.
[15:36:13] <wiesand> Your search finds some arm64 related stack by Andrew...
[15:36:16] <wiesand> Thanks
[15:37:08] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402> Ah, maybe that's where I saw it.  I couldn't find anything in RT or on
the mailing list, so I stared wondering if I had imagined it.
[15:38:47] <wiesand> I doubt we have resources for caring about arm...
[15:38:50] <meffie> do you want arm64 for 1.8?
[15:38:52] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402> I guess I'll also point out that 11599 was on your list of "maybe for
1.6.17, not merged on master" -- meffie, do you remember what the
state of that is?
[15:39:21] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402> I have no arm resources myself, but taking the updated
config.guess/etc. is worth doing on general principles.
[15:39:53] <meffie> i'm not sure what a can say about arm64 :) i'll find out.
[15:40:28] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402> Anyway, that's probably enough to keep us busy for this week, so I
should probably stop now.
Also, find some breakfast...
[15:41:23] <wiesand> And dinner for me :)
[15:41:29] <meffie> 11599, was the think were i try to find the local interfaces using rx_SomeCalls() before rx_Init(), which seems to be a bad idea
[15:41:40] <meffie> s/think/thing/
[15:42:20] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402> Right.  But do we have a path forward on it?
[15:42:49] <meffie> even tho we do that someother places.  i was thinking maybe we need something non-rx to get the interfaces? maybe opr?
[15:43:24] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402> That might be a good place for such a thing, yeah.
[15:43:36] <wiesand> That would rule it out as a 1.6.17 candidate
[15:43:41] <meffie> yes.
[15:45:02] <wiesand> Ok, let’s call it a day?
[15:45:08] <meffie> unfortunately, unless i come up with a better idea. ok thanks
[15:45:32] <wiesand> Thanks a lot everyone!
[15:45:37] <meffie> thanks, bye
[15:45:40] <wiesand> Bye
[15:45:41] wiesand leaves the room
[15:45:43] meffie leaves the room
[15:45:56] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl52767402> Thanks!
[23:17:46] mvita leaves the room