On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 4:43 PM, Andrew Beekhof <and...@beekhof.net> wrote:
> > > > > But that is for 1.1 branch that is not considered as "stable"... > > No, existing functionality its very stable. > Its just the new features that might have some extra corner cases > we've not seen exercised yet. > > Put it this way, 1.1 is what Red Hat and SUSE ship. > And in fact I saw it and its documentation files in rhel6 beta2... and it was not so clear to me the situation... now it is... >From your link below, now I see that we have also pacemaker 1.1 prebuilt binaries for rh el 5... Good! So for the future, the upcoming RHEL/CentOS 6.x will include ootb the 1.1 without clusterlabs repo possibly ? > Correct. > > http://theclusterguy.clusterlabs.org/post/441442543/new-pacemaker-release-series > Thanks! After reading it, one question: To understand what is a schema and sentences such as - If the existing syntax is all you need, consider *1.1* with the * pacemaker-1.0* schema. - If you want to try a new stable feature, use *1.1* with the * pacemaker-1.2* schema. - If you want to try a new experimental feature, use *1.1* with the * pacemaker-1.1* schema. what do I need? Does this correspond only to have 1.1 installed and set the "validate-with" parameter for example to validate-with="pacemaker-1.0" ? And in this case I'll receive an error if tryign to set a 1.1 feature? Sorry for going off topic wth the original thread... > > Will it be backported in upcoming 1.0.9 (future stable update planned for > > June)? > > Already done. > Thanks again Gianluca
_______________________________________________ Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://developerbugs.linux-foundation.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Pacemaker
