Difference between revisions of "CDWG Minutes 2013-04-10"

From OpenSFS
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 36: Line 36:
  
 
* Mention that we will discuss OS support roadmap
 
* Mention that we will discuss OS support roadmap
* John Carrier - TWG rfp - need
+
* John Carrier - Mentioned that folks working on the TWG RFP need to reply in the affermative if they plan to be on the RFP committee.
  
 
=== Other ===
 
=== Other ===
  
 
We went into a discussion about tracking issues against releases in jira, partial motivated by Chris's email about his understanding of the correct use of the "Fix Version/s" field.  Lots of opinions on this one.  We are going to table the discussion until after the 2.4 release, because there is to much left to do to make changes now.  We will raise the issue again shortly after the 2.4.0 tag so that we can have better procedures in place for the 2.5 development cycle.
 
We went into a discussion about tracking issues against releases in jira, partial motivated by Chris's email about his understanding of the correct use of the "Fix Version/s" field.  Lots of opinions on this one.  We are going to table the discussion until after the 2.4 release, because there is to much left to do to make changes now.  We will raise the issue again shortly after the 2.4.0 tag so that we can have better procedures in place for the 2.5 development cycle.

Revision as of 10:17, 10 April 2013

Agenda

  • Continue Lustre roadmap discussion
  • 2.4 status updates
  • Any topics for LUG2013

Attendance

  • Chris Morrone (LLNL)
  • Cory Spitz (Cray)
  • Peter Jones (Intel)
  • Bruce Korb (Xyratex)
  • John Carrier (Cray)
  • Kevin Canady (Xyratex)

Minutes

Roadmap Discussion

Change:

  • Drop 1.8
  • Remove logos
  • HSM move to 2.5
  • DNE2 move to 2.6
  • Add 2.7 listed as next maintence branch? But release with no.

2.4 Status Update

  • Moderate number of blocks, fixes for majority of blockers in progress
  • Hoping to still tag this month, but a slip of a week or two into May possible
  • Cory mentioned a new potential block, LU-3140
  • Discussion about status of RHEL6.4 support. ldiskfs support for RHEL6.4 landed yesterday, and the rest is imminent. RHEL6.4 kernel bug was allowed to delay landings. There was concern expressed about announcing RHEL6.4 as the officially supported release when support is only going into the branch at this late date.

LUG2013 Topics

  • Mention that we will discuss OS support roadmap
  • John Carrier - Mentioned that folks working on the TWG RFP need to reply in the affermative if they plan to be on the RFP committee.

Other

We went into a discussion about tracking issues against releases in jira, partial motivated by Chris's email about his understanding of the correct use of the "Fix Version/s" field. Lots of opinions on this one. We are going to table the discussion until after the 2.4 release, because there is to much left to do to make changes now. We will raise the issue again shortly after the 2.4.0 tag so that we can have better procedures in place for the 2.5 development cycle.