This was made clear to us at the 2015 Lustre Users Group conference in
Denver that just wrapped up yesterday. You can see the roadmap that was
released here:
http://cdn.opensfs.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Lustre_Development_Update_Morrone.pdf
Bug fixes and such will still be rolled up in the major releases that
occur every six months, but the days of maintenance releases are over.
We need to make sure that a group that tries out Lustre four months
after a major release reveals a nasty bug have a clear path to resolving
it for the version of Lustre they're using.
Andrew Wagner
Research Systems Administrator
Space Science and Engineering
University of Wisconsin
andrew.wag...@ssec.wisc.edu | 608-261-1360
On 04/16/2015 06:37 AM, E.S. Rosenberg wrote:
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 9:53 PM, Colin Faber <cfa...@gmail.com> wrote:
I think in general this is a good idea. As discussed at the OpenSFS board
meeting yesterday, it would be really nice for organizations which are
building custom releases themselves to provide this patch list as a wiki
page on the lustre.org wiki (http://wiki.lustre.org).
This would probably be a good first step, maybe format in such as way to
include a brief description of the patch and the problem it's solving for
that site.
I'm planning on doing this for my Org's release as well, so it's extremely
clear to anyone glancing at the site what we're doing and why we're doing
it.
-cf
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Scott Nolin <scott.no...@ssec.wisc.edu>
wrote:
Since Intel will not be making community releases for 2.5.4 or 2.x.0
releases now, it seems the community will need to maintain some sort of
patch list against these releases. Especially stability, data corruption,
and security patches.
Where/when was this announced?
Thanks,
Eli
I think this is important so if people are trying a Lustre community
release they need to be aware of any bugs that might exist, and if they're
addressed. If things are unstable, lustre will (re)gain a negative
reputation as a file system you should not trust with real data.
I don't have any answers here, but would like to start a wider
conversation.
Thanks,
Scott
_______________________________________________
lustre-discuss mailing list
lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org
_______________________________________________
lustre-discuss mailing list
lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org
_______________________________________________
lustre-discuss mailing list
lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org
_______________________________________________
lustre-discuss mailing list
lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org
