Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Release 4.1: LTM release targeted for end of May

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:26 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri < pkara...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 1:51 PM, Amar Tumballi > wrote: > >> >> >>> >> Further, as we hit end of March, we would make it mandatory for >>> features >>> >> to have required spec and

[Gluster-devel] ./tests/basic/mount-nfs-auth.t spews out warnings

All, I was trying to debug a regression failure [1]. When I ran test locally on my laptop, I see some warnings as below: ++ gluster --mode=script --wignore volume get patchy nfs.mount-rmtab ++ xargs dirname ++ awk '/^nfs.mount-rmtab/{print $2}' dirname: missing operand Try 'dirname --help' for

[Gluster-devel] Announcing Gluster release 4.0.0 (Short Term Maintenance)

The Gluster community celebrates 13 years of development with this latest release, Gluster 4.0. This release enables improved integration with containers, an enhanced user experience, and a next-generation management framework. The 4.0 release helps cloud-native app developers choose Gluster as

[Gluster-devel] Cage internal network lock down

Hi, So, I have been working on tightening the internal network of the gluster community cage part of the world, e.g., all the servers in *.int.rht.gluster.org. That's mostly internal infra servers, and newer non cloud builder, but I plan to later also move gerrit/jenkins and various servers. The

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Proposal to change the version numbers of Gluster project

On 03/12/2018 02:32 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > On 03/12/2018 10:34 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote: >> * >> >> After 4.1, we want to move to either continuous numbering (like >> Fedora), or time based (like ubuntu etc) release numbers. Which >> is the model we pick is

[Gluster-devel] ./tests/bugs/bug-1110262.t is a bad test susceptible to failures due to race-conditions

All, This test does: 1. mount a volume 2. kill a brick in the volume 3. mkdir (/somedir) In my local tests and in [1], I see that mkdir in step 3 fails because there is no dht-layout on root directory. The reason I think is by the time first lookup on "/" hit dht, a brick was killed as per

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Release 4.1: LTM release targeted for end of May

On 03/13/2018 03:53 AM, Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay wrote: > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 1:05 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri > wrote: >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 7:07 AM, Shyam Ranganathan >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> As we wind down on 4.0 activities

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Release 4.1: LTM release targeted for end of May

> > >> > >> Further, as we hit end of March, we would make it mandatory for features > >> to have required spec and doc labels, before the code is merged, so > >> factor in efforts for the same if not already done. > > > > > > Could you explain the point above further? Is it just the label or the

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Release 4.1: LTM release targeted for end of May

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 1:05 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 7:07 AM, Shyam Ranganathan > wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> As we wind down on 4.0 activities (waiting on docs to hit the site, and >> packages to be available in

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Release 4.1: LTM release targeted for end of May

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 7:07 AM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote: > Hi, > > As we wind down on 4.0 activities (waiting on docs to hit the site, and > packages to be available in CentOS repositories before announcing the > release), it is time to start preparing for the 4.1 release.

Re: [Gluster-devel] Announcing Softserve- serve yourself a VM

> We’ve enabled certain limits for this application: >> >>1. >> >>Maximum allowance of 5 VM at a time across all the users. User have >>to wait until a slot is available for them after 5 machines allocation. >>2. >> >>User will get the requesting machines maximum upto 4 hours.