- Friday, April 6, 2018

release-team@conference.openafs.org

Friday, April 6, 2018< ^ >

Room Configuration

Room Occupants

GMT+0
[11:55:21] Marcio Barbosa joins the room
[12:57:10] meffie joins the room
[13:01:02] wiesand joins the room
[13:01:19] <wiesand> Good morning
[13:01:28] <meffie> good morning
[13:02:04] <kaduk@jabber.openafs.org/barnowl> greetings
[13:02:50] <wiesand> I'm just doing a test build of something very much like I expect 1.6.23pre1 to be.
[13:03:31] <wiesand> Once I've seen it fly, I can merge most of what's in the queue.
[13:03:45] <wiesand> So, slow but steady progress.
[13:04:53] <kaduk@jabber.openafs.org/barnowl> cool
[13:05:24] <meffie> excellent, thank you.
[13:05:53] <wiesand> It would be nice to have 12986 and 12997
[13:06:48] <meffie> 12995 (redhat: remove extra kernel version check) was submitted to address the comment andrew had for 12658 (redhat: fix rpmbuild command line option defaults)
[13:07:54] <wiesand> saw it
[13:08:23] <meffie> i believe i still have an comment to address for 12667 (afs: fix afs_xserver deadlock in afsdb refresh)
[13:08:48] <wiesand> the last serious change not yet pulled up is the "ctf" one (12902)
[13:09:21] <wiesand> that's (1) because ther's some skew again I haven't made up my mind how to resolve yet
[13:09:22] Marcio Barbosa leaves the room
[13:09:53] <wiesand> and (2) maybe it's a feature to be left to 1.8?
[13:09:54] <meffie> ah, i can rebase it
[13:10:10] <kaduk@jabber.openafs.org/barnowl> I feel like I should probably wait to merge the 1.8 pullups until we
are satisfied that the tag is not going to slip
[13:11:18] <meffie> also, we would like to add ctf records to the fileserver (as well as libafs), so another patch is needed.
[13:11:30] Marcio Barbosa joins the room
[13:11:43] <wiesand> re 12902 rebase: no it's stuff like your "mv README INSTALL" - I have to look in more detail whether we want to pull these up too
[13:12:02] <wiesand> technically, it shouldn't be difficult - I'll cry for help if needed
[13:12:06] <meffie> oh, i assumed those were 1.8.x specific
[13:13:14] <wiesand> Ben: fine - the FBSD and RPM changes are not critical for 1.6.23pre1 IMHO. I think they can go into 1.6.23 without another prerelease
[13:13:30] <kaduk@jabber.openafs.org/barnowl> *nods*
[13:14:33] <wiesand> So we're really getting close to pre1. Finally.
[13:15:13] <wiesand> And that's all I have regarding 1.6 today
[13:15:32] <meffie> hooray!
[13:16:01] <wiesand> Anyone else? Or on to 1.8?
[13:16:37] <wiesand> On to 1.8 then
[13:17:05] <kaduk@jabber.openafs.org/barnowl> We're really getting close to -final. Finally.
[13:17:37] <kaduk@jabber.openafs.org/barnowl> The debian package builds, though it was too late last night for me to
actually install it locally and start running it.
[13:18:16] <kaduk@jabber.openafs.org/barnowl> And I'll try to do a bit of testing with a freebsd server, too.
Does anyone want to do some particular testing tasks before we call it
done?
[13:18:32] <meffie> i do not know of anything.
[13:19:45] <kaduk@jabber.openafs.org/barnowl> Hopefully there will be a web change up soon for review
[13:19:45] Marcio Barbosa leaves the room
[13:20:31] <meffie> great, thank you
[13:21:17] <kaduk@jabber.openafs.org/barnowl> Thanks for helping out with the pullups to 1.8 -- was that only
mostly, or entirely Stephan?
[13:21:49] <meffie> Stephan I believe
[13:21:51] Marcio Barbosa joins the room
[13:23:05] <wiesand> Certainly not entirely. Who cares anyway.
[13:23:07] <kaduk@jabber.openafs.org/barnowl> I don't know that we have talked about rules/guidelines for what
should get pulled back to 1.8 going forward.
[13:23:36] <kaduk@jabber.openafs.org/barnowl> "not rxgk" and "not ipv6", clearly, but are there other rough
guidelines we want to use?
[13:24:33] <wiesand> My personal preference would be "as much as reasonably possible"
[13:24:36] <meffie> i assume we want to reduce the number of changes
[13:24:48] <wiesand> And yes that excludes rxgk and ipv6
[13:24:49] <meffie> really?
[13:25:14] <meffie> you mean as much as possible to reduce the code skew?
[13:25:28] <wiesand> that's one good reason
[13:26:21] <wiesand> another one is that in quite a few cases some issues were found during review for inclusion in the stable release
[13:26:50] <meffie> yes, that is a good point.
[13:27:48] <wiesand> and 2.0 (will the version be 2.0?) will have killer features - no need to artificially postpone the minor ones
[13:28:03] <kaduk@jabber.openafs.org/barnowl> I think it would be 2.0, yes.
[13:29:32] <meffie> ok, so we should plan on pulling up as much as we reasonably can for 1.8.x, even minor new features. that's good news.
[13:29:50] <meffie> as we make changes on the master branch.
[13:30:14] <kaduk@jabber.openafs.org/barnowl> I think that seems reasonable, yeah.
[13:30:18] <wiesand> well, it's up to the guardian to set the policy - this was just me
[13:31:06] <wiesand> The dust will settle when we discuss individual changes.
[13:31:12] <meffie> ok.
[13:31:37] <kaduk@jabber.openafs.org/barnowl> Any other 1.8 topics?
[13:32:47] <wiesand> not here - yet ;-)
[13:32:59] <meffie> not yet :)
[13:33:24] <kaduk@jabber.openafs.org/barnowl> :)
[13:33:29] <kaduk@jabber.openafs.org/barnowl> Okay, let's move on to master.
[13:33:37] <meffie> ok
[13:34:49] <meffie> we will be getting back to rxgk review (of the gerrits in gerrit)
[13:34:52] <kaduk@jabber.openafs.org/barnowl> I see there's been motion on the autoconf-cleanup and solaris-warnings
topics, and maybe the remove-automake topic has settled?
[13:35:42] <kaduk@jabber.openafs.org/barnowl> Is there much to discuss about those other than noting their
existence?
[13:35:45] <meffie> ah, i want to rebase Peter Foley's patches and reconcile with marcios
[13:36:04] <meffie> 12199..12201
[13:36:19] <meffie> for the remove-automake topic
[13:37:09] <kaduk@jabber.openafs.org/barnowl> Oh, right, we did have those sitting around as well.
[13:37:13] <kaduk@jabber.openafs.org/barnowl> Good memory :)
[13:37:44] <meffie> i didnt remember, i got the crazy idea to look :)
[13:38:28] <wiesand> Maybe we should do a sweep over the open changes for master after 1.8.1?
[13:38:51] <kaduk@jabber.openafs.org/barnowl> Why wait until 1.8.1? ;)
[13:39:14] <wiesand> Or is the strategy to get 2.0 done a.s.a.p. and postpone most everything else to 2.2?
[13:40:28] <kaduk@jabber.openafs.org/barnowl> I don't think 2.0 will actually be done a.s.a.p., and we should not
really defer going back through the existing changes that have piled
up
[13:40:56] <kaduk@jabber.openafs.org/barnowl> There are some messy ubik upgrade issues that will require much
pondering, yet.
[13:40:58] <meffie> a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush ?
[13:41:47] <kaduk@jabber.openafs.org/barnowl> Something like that
[13:44:16] <meffie> heh
[13:47:25] <meffie> any other topics? about to run of to another meeting...
[13:48:24] <wiesand> Looks like we're finished? Adjourn?
[13:49:18] <kaduk@jabber.openafs.org/barnowl> I think we're done, yeah
[13:49:22] <kaduk@jabber.openafs.org/barnowl> Thanks for playing!
[13:49:29] <wiesand> Let's adjourn then. Thanks a lot everyone!
[13:49:44] <meffie> yes thank you! i try to actually do the minutes/summary this time.
[13:50:07] <wiesand> thank you!
[13:50:15] <meffie> have a good weekend
[13:50:24] wiesand leaves the room
[14:04:05] meffie leaves the room
[14:36:44] mvita leaves the room
[14:36:45] mvita joins the room
[22:17:41] Marcio Barbosa leaves the room