LWG Minutes 2016-10-05: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created page with "== Attendance == Cray: Cory Spitz, Ben Evans, Chris Horn <br /> ORNL: Sarp Oral, James Simmons <br /> Indiana: Ken Rawlings <br /> Intel: Joe Gmitter, Andreas Dilger, Peter...") |
mNo edit summary |
||
Line 59: | Line 59: | ||
<br /> | <br /> | ||
'''Next meeting will be on 2016-10-19''' | '''Next meeting will be on 2016-10-19''' | ||
[[Category:LWG]] |
Latest revision as of 19:44, 28 July 2017
Attendance
Cray: Cory Spitz, Ben Evans, Chris Horn
ORNL: Sarp Oral, James Simmons
Indiana: Ken Rawlings
Intel: Joe Gmitter, Andreas Dilger, Peter Jones
Actions
New Actions Captured:
- None
Existing Open Actions:
- None
Actions Recently Closed:
- None
Minutes
2.9 Release Status/Update
Peter
- The number of blockers is slightly up from last week, however, some are just interop issues due to recent landings.
- The largest item to close out on is SSK development. There have been a number of suggestions for implementation change made by Intel security experts. Those changes have been made and are queued up for testing and landing.
- Anything else to report from the community?
- No word of any other focused 2.9 testing by the community due to other priorities.
2.10 Release Update
Peter
- Once we branch when reaching code freeze for 2.9, we can begin looking at 2.10 landings.
- There is a feature test plan template that cased be used for feature development in the 2.10 cycle.
Upstream Lustre Client
James
- The 4.9 release is going to be a 2.7 client equivalent. There was ~120 patch delta between 2.6 to 2.7.
- After the next merge window James is looking to try out 2.8 patches. James has had a rough look at ~1/4 of the code and there are ~40 patches thus far that will be needed.
- Will the kernel go to 4.10 numbering after 4.9?
- James: I believe that it will.
lustre.org
Ken
- The Mediawiki upgrade is occurring.
- We are getting close on the old wiki migration.
- There are about 70 old architecture documents and there is uncertainty about how to handle them. The current plan is to preserve them as static pages.
- Peter - I would be concerned about having stale references on the architecture page, but agree that we should keep it available. Perhaps the creation of a historical architecture documents area would be appropriate to retain the documents, but with a warning that data may be stale.
- All present agree.
- Peter - I would be concerned about having stale references on the architecture page, but agree that we should keep it available. Perhaps the creation of a historical architecture documents area would be appropriate to retain the documents, but with a warning that data may be stale.
Other Business
- Sarp: organizational changes in OpenSFS
- We are now officially operating under a new set of bylaws and a new board composition.
- The new board consists only of Lustre users (no vendors).
- Sarp has accepted a role on the board and, therefore, is stepping away from the LWG co-chair role.
- Dustin Leverman of ORNL will be taking on the co-char role as Sarp’s replacement.
- A “save the date” announcement will be coming soon for LUG. The event will be hosted by Indiana University this year. More details to come in the announcement.
- A reminder that the OpenSFS board meetings are open to the public and anyone can attend that is interested.
Next meeting will be on 2016-10-19