On Fri, Oct 12, 2007 at 09:31:46AM -0700, Jim Garlick wrote: > On Fri, 12 Oct 2007, Niklas Edmundsson wrote: > > > In reality, I think that doing non-QA'd snapshot releases might be the > > way to go. That is, releases with the useful more-or-less trivial > > fixes that avoids crashes etc. and that will be included in the next > > QA'd release. > > Yes, we find ourselves carrying a lot of bugfix patches in our > internal Lustre releases (50+ in our last production release based > on 1.4.8, already 30+ in our release planned for january based on 1.6.2). > > I think it would be useful if CFS would freeze features in a release at > some point and do bugfix-only releases. For example, we're trying to > get 1.6.2 stablized for production use and we know that many bugfixes > that we need are in 1.6.3, but we have to backport them because we don't > want to destablize our effort by taking the features in 1.6.3.
This sounds like a lot of duplicated effort that if CFS did not want to support could be managed by a decent distributed source control system (either git or mercurial), and the interested 'power users'. It's also annoying that a quick web search for 'Lustre CVS' turns up a bunch of ancient or dead links. If I could get the latest Lustre development version from a *public* source control server, I'd be using Lustre for testing remote filesystem access over InfiniBand WAN links. As it is, the only parallel filesystem I can easily find with a public source control server is PVFS, so that's what I'm using, and it works quite nicely. _______________________________________________ Lustre-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.clusterfs.com/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
