- Wednesday, September 21, 2016

release-team@conference.openafs.org

Wednesday, September 21, 2016< ^ >

Room Configuration

Room Occupants

GMT+0
[02:06:12] Jeffrey Altman leaves the room
[04:16:29] Jeffrey Altman joins the room
[12:53:55] meffie joins the room
[13:20:30] mvita joins the room
[13:47:35] <meffie> good morning.
[13:56:16] stephan.wiesand joins the room
[13:57:32] <stephan.wiesand> good afternoon
[13:57:39] <mvita> hello
[13:57:44] <stephan.wiesand> hi
[13:58:30] <Jeffrey Altman> good evening
[13:58:50] <stephan.wiesand> evening? where r u?
[13:59:00] <Jeffrey Altman> time of day is relative
[13:59:06] <stephan.wiesand> indeed
[13:59:18] <Jeffrey Altman> I'm in Nashville at the moment but moving back to New York on Friday
[14:00:39] <stephan.wiesand> hmm, nashville should be EDT or even earlier?
[14:01:09] <stephan.wiesand> Anyway, let's start...
[14:01:23] <stephan.wiesand> Mark: thanks for the linux-next changes
[14:01:49] <stephan.wiesand> Looks like we're still good for Linux 4.8?
[14:01:49] kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowlAEEFA31A leaves the room
[14:01:49] kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowlAEEFA31A leaves the room
[14:02:18] <mvita> yes, still good for 4.8
[14:02:27] <mvita> sorry, was checking linux stuff
[14:02:30] kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA joins the room
[14:02:44] <stephan.wiesand> Great. This means no pressure to rush out 1.6.19pre1.
[14:03:08] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA> Will someone please send a message to the openafs room to boot my
stale client entries?
[14:03:34] <mvita> I have not had time to look into the xfs performance thing that Jeffrey mentioned a while back
[14:03:58] <stephan.wiesand> jeffrey: any more info on this?
[14:04:03] <stephan.wiesand> ben: done
[14:05:12] <Jeffrey Altman> no more details on xfs performance issues other than we have noticed a 50MB/sec drop in disk cache performance on xfs from 4.7 to 4.8
[14:05:16] <stephan.wiesand> I just merged 12388
[14:05:34] <stephan.wiesand> Jeff: Thanks
[14:05:49] <meffie> thanks stephan.wiesand
[14:06:10] <stephan.wiesand> Next on my must-have list for 1.6.19 is 12389
[14:06:29] <stephan.wiesand> the remaining ubik fix - please review
[14:06:33] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA> I seem to have forgotten what you are still waiting to hit master for
1.6
[14:06:52] <stephan.wiesand> hold on
[14:07:33] <stephan.wiesand> 12362/12363 would be required for re-enabling "shake harder"
[14:07:59] <stephan.wiesand> 12359 is on my candidate list but certainly not crucial
[14:08:03] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA> *nods* those are probably next on my list to look at
[14:08:18] <stephan.wiesand> 12346/12347 make sense to me but need review
[14:08:58] <stephan.wiesand> I think that concludes my list of things to merge on master before consideration for 1.6
[14:09:01] <meffie> 11979 on master allows users on solaris 11.2+ to use pags again.
[14:09:18] <stephan.wiesand> 79 or 78?
[14:09:19] <meffie> (that was andrew's patch ircc)
[14:09:39] <meffie> 11978 is a prereq for 11979
[14:10:02] <stephan.wiesand> my list says you asked for 11855 12383 11978 last week, so I'll add 11979
[14:10:10] <meffie> so, 11978/11979
[14:10:38] <meffie> oh, sorry i might have missed the last one. it has not been merged on master yet.
[14:10:51] <stephan.wiesand> 11855 is a non-trivial backport
[14:11:19] <stephan.wiesand> 11978 has path conflicts with 12365 12366 12346 12347
[14:12:11] <stephan.wiesand> Thus I'd like to postpone this bunch for the time being, at least until those already in gerrit for 1.6 have been merged. They need review.
[14:12:32] <stephan.wiesand> And frankly this may be a 1.8 topic.
[14:12:32] <meffie> sounds good.
[14:13:29] <stephan.wiesand> But let's see after the potentially conflicting changes have been merged.
[14:13:46] <stephan.wiesand> And I think that;s about my list of 1.6.19 candidates
[14:14:20] <stephan.wiesand> (still waiting for verdicts on 12328)
[14:15:14] <stephan.wiesand> my latest test build included 12365 12366 12388 12389 12368 on top of the current HEAD and looks fine
[14:15:26] <stephan.wiesand> So, review review review...
[14:15:43] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA> > looked fine
yay
[14:16:20] <stephan.wiesand> As usual, lightly tested on EL5/6/7
[14:16:23] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA> So 1.6 is mostly summarized as "review review review" for this week?
"I thought that was 1.8's job" ;)
[14:17:10] <stephan.wiesand> Thanks to the ubik change you made ready: yes
[14:17:22] <stephan.wiesand> So, on to 1.8z?
[14:18:39] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA> I guess so.
[14:18:47] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA> As you saw, I merged several things last week.
[14:19:07] <meffie> yay
[14:19:26] <stephan.wiesand> Your posting to -devel was a "good thing (TM)" - did it actually help?
[14:20:00] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA> I don't think I saw any particular results from it yet, but have been
distracted for the past few days.
[14:20:26] <jhg> good morning
[14:20:33] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA> Anyway, people should please check the list in the post to -devel.
[14:20:45] <mvita> will do
[14:20:52] <mvita> it's JOE!
[14:21:01] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA> If it's accurate, we could potentially be seeing a 1.8 alpha 1 as soon
as next week.
[14:21:17] <stephan.wiesand> Hooray
[14:21:18] <mvita> zowie!
[14:21:43] <meffie> woot.
[14:21:49] <mvita> "Christmas in September"
[14:21:54] <stephan.wiesand> You mean a 1.8 branch, 3 months before X-mas???
[14:22:18] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA> Note also the note at the bottom about needing to go through the past
few months' of gerrit submissions and check for anything critical, and
needing to prepare something resembling release notes.
[14:22:51] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA> > 3 months before X-mas
"I thought the final release was supposed to be at christmas", plenty
of time left
[14:23:11] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA> Anyone interested in working on the gerrit sweep and/or release notes?
[14:23:28] <meffie> yes
[14:23:37] <mvita> yes for release notes
[14:23:44] <jhg> nothing to report on splice()... I found a macOS Sierra umount crash that I have been getting into. that's about it
[14:23:58] <stephan.wiesand> Thanks Joe.
[14:24:35] <stephan.wiesand> Re 1.8 release notes: I think we'll not get those done w/o teamwork
[14:24:43] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA> Definitely.
[14:24:48] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA> But how best to split things up?
[14:25:20] <stephan.wiesand> Start out with a change to NEWS on master, then work on it in gerrit?
[14:25:56] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA> I was thinking more along the lines of "divvy up the commit space",
but that's also a good idea.
[14:27:08] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA> Anyway, I have another meeting in a few minutes.
[14:27:39] <stephan.wiesand> OK. Thanks a lot Ben!
[14:27:53] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA> But I'll throw out one last thing -- now that we've merged a patch
that fixes the ubik data loss issue due to ignoring down sites, are we
interested in pushing either of the two follow-up changes?
[14:28:25] <stephan.wiesand> er, which ones?
[14:29:00] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA> 12283 and 12290
[14:30:37] <stephan.wiesand> My perception is that they're not critical
[14:30:56] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA> Definitely not critical, yes.
[14:31:20] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA> It's more of "do we care to do them at all, ever".
The logging, I'm leaning towards, but the other one is less clear.
[14:31:49] <meffie> i thought 12283 was critical.
[14:32:23] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA> It used to be.
[14:32:50] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA> Then I applied a rototiller and move the critical part to 12289.
[14:32:56] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA> *moved
[14:33:01] <meffie> ah
[14:33:35] <stephan.wiesand> rototiller... new vocabulary for me to look up :)
[14:34:10] <meffie> power tool for gardening.
[14:34:29] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA> Turns turf into soft, plantable, dirt bed.
[14:34:32] <stephan.wiesand> thanks :)
[14:34:52] <stephan.wiesand> ah, a plow?
[14:35:00] <meffie> yes
[14:35:13] <Jeffrey Altman> neither 12283 nor 12290 are necessary
[14:36:16] <stephan.wiesand> so let's try to keep them in mind, but don't delay 1.8 for them
[14:37:08] <stephan.wiesand> Anything else to discuss today?
[14:37:18] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA> review review review! :)
[14:37:32] <meffie> review ^ 3
[14:37:39] <stephan.wiesand> exactly
[14:37:46] <stephan.wiesand> r3
[14:38:21] <stephan.wiesand> Let's call it a meeting (after all, Im on vacation ;-)
[14:38:30] <kadukoafs@gmail.com/barnowl9C09F4AA> Sounds good. Thanks!
[14:38:37] <stephan.wiesand> Thanks a lot everyone!
[14:38:39] <meffie> thanks, have a good vacation.
[14:38:42] <mvita> bye
[14:38:52] stephan.wiesand leaves the room
[15:13:20] Jeffrey Altman leaves the room
[15:19:32] Jeffrey Altman joins the room
[15:32:39] meffie leaves the room