Hi Noel:
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
At the same time it would be a lot more helpful to the process
in James were in sync. While I understand that this is not on
the James short list of priorities
Excuse me? Where did that come from?
Read the thread ... :-)
I thought that we were cooperating with you.
There are a bunch of things going on - Avalon is starting is rollout of
release, within a few weeks we will be hitting the Cornerstone content
relase process which concerns James more than any other project. That
realese process is (from my point of view) is very much about supporting
the excalation of James. However, this, again "from my point of view"
needs an active process so we can get James in shape before release
condidates start comming out of Avalon. This has nothing to do with
what version James locks into - it about enabling a mechanisms whereby I
can validate the candidates I'll signing off on. To do that we need up
rollup James from CM-to-SM, sort out an identified loop, and arrive at a
platform against which we can do some real evaluation.
My understanding, Stephen, was that you were working on the changes, and I
have been watching the various parts of Avalon go into a release cycle. My
impression was that we had agreed to pickup those parts as they became
release eligible (and, as you know, there is a fix in logkit 1.2
specifically because of James), and that you were in the process of making
the necessary code changes (e.g., CM -> SM).
First cut on the CM-SM transition was coplete one month ago (today).
That process raised issues that after a couple of weeks were resolved
down to being a combnination of somethig strage in James CVS head (the
looping problems), combnined with some bugs inthe James test code, +
probably issue relative the current Excalibur candidate releases on the
thread and pooling areas. A second cut at the transition was applied
against Pete' James variant which proved to be totally succesfull - in
fact it was this process that identifies that there is a definitate
problem in James CVS head (which I presume still exist) and the the
issues are indepent of the CM-SM migration. To be frank, I was hoping we
would have cleared these things before the release process started over
on Avalon.
Do you have the code changes ready?
They have been ready for at least four weeks. But to be honest - it't
only in the last two weeks that I've know that it isn't the code change
that is problamatic - it's the transition/target combination that is the
area of interest/concern - and that's the thing I've been asking for
support on - i.e. there is something problamatic in the James CVS head
releative to the current builds. Resolving/identifying this IHVHO is a
prerequisite to Avalon Excalibur and Corenerstone realese candidate
evalutation. I suspect there are problems low down but I've aleady been
through the process of validating tbis on at least four seperate
occasions. If I run either Phoneix or Merlin using the release
candidate (and related candidates, etc.) I end up in an infite loop
inside James. This is somethig wrong and it needs to be fixed before
the Avalon RC process for Exclibur and Cornerstone can really rolls into
place.
Oh, that reminds me ... Serge, didn't we pass a vote to give Stephen commit
rights? Do you need to verify the vote count, and submit a request to
infrastructure or root?
Nothing as yet.
Commit privs or a target to send a zip/diff to - whatever - I don't mind.
Cheers, Steve.
--
Stephen J. McConnell
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.osm.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
