Thank you Ravi for your comments. I do understand that it might not be very 
wise to risk any mistakes by rushing this fix into 3.12.8. In that case I will 
be more patient and wait for 3.12.9 next month.

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On April 11, 2018 5:09 PM, Ravishankar N <ravishan...@redhat.com> wrote:

> Mabi,
>
> It looks like one of the patches is not a straight forward cherry-pick to the 
> 3.12 branch. Even though the conflict might be easy to resolve, I don't think 
> it is a good idea to hurry it for tomorrow. We will definitely have it ready 
> by the next minor release (or if by chance the release is delayed and the 
> back port is reviewed and merged before that). Hope that is acceptable.
>
> -Ravi
>
> On 04/11/2018 01:11 PM, mabi wrote:
>
>> Dear Jiffin,
>>
>> Would it be possible to have the following backported to 3.12:
>>
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1482064
>>
>> See my mail with subject "New 3.12.7 possible split-brain on replica 3" on 
>> the list earlier this week for more details.
>>
>> Thank you very much.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Mabi
>>
>> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
>> On April 11, 2018 5:16 AM, Jiffin Tony Thottan 
>> [<jthot...@redhat.com>](mailto:jthot...@redhat.com) wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> It's time to prepare the 3.12.8 release, which falls on the 10th of
>>> each month, and hence would be 12-04-2018 this time around.
>>>
>>> This mail is to call out the following,
>>>
>>> 1) Are there any pending *blocker* bugs that need to be tracked for
>>> 3.12.7? If so mark them against the provided tracker [1] as blockers
>>> for the release, or at the very least post them as a response to this
>>> mail
>>>
>>> 2) Pending reviews in the 3.12 dashboard will be part of the release,
>>> *iff* they pass regressions and have the review votes, so use the
>>> dashboard [2] to check on the status of your patches to 3.12 and get
>>> these going
>>>
>>> 3) I have made checks on what went into 3.10 post 3.12 release and if
>>> these fixes are already included in 3.12 branch, then status on this is 
>>> *green*
>>> as all fixes ported to 3.10, are ported to 3.12 as well.
>>>
>>> @Mlind
>>>
>>> IMO https://review.gluster.org/19659 is like a minor feature to me. Can 
>>> please provide a justification for why it need to include in 3.12 stable 
>>> release?
>>>
>>> And please rebase the change as well
>>>
>>> @Raghavendra
>>>
>>> The smoke failed for https://review.gluster.org/#/c/19818/. Can please 
>>> check the same?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Jiffin
>>>
>>> [1] Release bug tracker:
>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=glusterfs-3.12.8
>>>
>>> [2] 3.12 review dashboard:
>>> https://review.gluster.org/#/projects/glusterfs,dashboards/dashboard:3-12-dashboard
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gluster-users mailing list
>> Gluster-users@gluster.org
>>
>> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

Reply via email to