Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Release 11: Revisting our proposed timeline and features

2022-11-06 Thread Shwetha Acharya 
Hi Amar,

We will be branching out release 11 this week.

Regards,
Shwetha

On Mon, Nov 7, 2022 at 9:47 AM Amar Tumballi  wrote:

> Other than 2 large PRs (CDC and zlib changes) we don't have any major
> pending tasks. I would like to propose we keep up with the proposed dates,
> and go ahead with the branching. If we merge these PRs, we can rebase and
> send it to the branch again.
>
> Shwetha Can you please go ahead with the branching related activities?
>
> -Amar
>
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 3:24 PM Xavi Hernandez 
> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 10:40 AM Yaniv Kaul  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 8:41 AM Xavi Hernandez 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 4:03 AM Amar Tumballi  wrote:

> Here is my honest take on this one.
>
> On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 3:06 PM Shwetha Acharya 
> wrote:
>
>> It is time to evaluate the fulfillment of our committed
>> features/improvements and the feasibility of the proposed deadlines as 
>> per Release
>> 11 tracker .
>>
>>
>> Currently our timeline is as follows:
>>
>> Code Freeze: 31-Oct-2022
>> RC : 30-Nov-2022
>> GA : 10-JAN-2023
>>
>> *Please evaluate the following and reply to this thread if you want
>> to convey anything important:*
>>
>> - Can we ensure to fulfill all the proposed requirements by the Code
>> Freeze?
>> - Do we need to add any more changes to accommodate any shortcomings
>> or improvements?
>> - Are we all good to go with the proposed timeline?
>>
>>
> We have delayed the release already by more than 1year, and that is a
> significant delay for any project. If the changes we work on is not 
> getting
> released frequently, the feedback loop for the project is delayed and 
> hence
> the further improvements. So, regardless of any pending promised things, 
> we
> should go ahead with the code-freeze and release on these dates.
>
> It is crucial for any projects / companies dependent on the project to
> plan accordingly. There may be already few others who would have planned
> their product release around these dates. Lets keep the same dates, and 
> try
> to achieve the tasks we have planned in these dates.
>

 I agree. Pending changes will need to be added to next release. Doing
 it at last time is not safe for stability.

>>>
>>> Generally, +1.
>>>
>>> - Some info on my in-flight PRs:
>>>
>>> I have multiple independent patches for the flexible array member
>>> conversion of different variables that are pending:
>>> https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/pull/3873
>>> https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/pull/3872
>>> https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/pull/3868  (this one is
>>> particularly interesting, I hope it works!)
>>> https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/pull/3861
>>> https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/pull/3870 (already in review,
>>> perhaps it can get it soon?)
>>>
>>
>> I'm already looking at these and I expect they can be merged before the
>> current code-freeze date.
>>
>>
>>> I have this for one for inode related code, which got some attention
>>> recently:
>>> https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/pull/3226
>>>
>>
>> I'll try to review this one before code-freeze, but it requires much more
>> care. Any help will be appreciated.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I think this one is worthwhile looking at:
>>> https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/pull/3854
>>>
>>
>> I'll try to take a look at this one also.
>>
>>
>>> I wish we could get rid of old, unsupported versions:
>>> https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/pull/3544
>>> (there's more to do, in different patches, but it's a start)
>>>
>>
>> This one is mostly ok, but I think we can't release a new version without
>> an explicit check for unsupported versions at least at the beginning, to
>> avoid problems when users upgrade directly from 3.x to 11.x.
>>
>>
>>> None of them is critical for release 11, though I'm unsure if I'll have
>>> the ability to complete them later.
>>>
>>>
>>> - The lack of EL9 official support (inc. testing infra.) is regrettable,
>>> and I think something worth fixing *before* release 11 - adding sanity
>>> on newer OS releases, which will use io_uring for example, is something we
>>> should definitely consider.
>>>
>>> Lastly, I thought zstandard compression to the CDC xlator is interesting
>>> for 11 (https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/pull/3841) - unsure if
>>> it's ready for inclusion, but overall impact for stability should be low,
>>> considered this is not a fully supported xlator anyway (and then
>>> https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/pull/3835 should / could be
>>> considered as well).
>>>
>>
>> I already started the review but I'm not very familiarized with cdc and
>> the compression libraries, so I'll need some more time.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Last though:
>>> If we are just time-based - sure, there's value

Re: [Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] Release 11: Revisting our proposed timeline and features

2022-11-06 Thread Amar Tumballi 
Other than 2 large PRs (CDC and zlib changes) we don't have any major
pending tasks. I would like to propose we keep up with the proposed dates,
and go ahead with the branching. If we merge these PRs, we can rebase and
send it to the branch again.

Shwetha Can you please go ahead with the branching related activities?

-Amar

On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 3:24 PM Xavi Hernandez  wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 10:40 AM Yaniv Kaul  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 8:41 AM Xavi Hernandez 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 4:03 AM Amar Tumballi  wrote:
>>>
 Here is my honest take on this one.

 On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 3:06 PM Shwetha Acharya 
 wrote:

> It is time to evaluate the fulfillment of our committed
> features/improvements and the feasibility of the proposed deadlines as 
> per Release
> 11 tracker .
>
>
> Currently our timeline is as follows:
>
> Code Freeze: 31-Oct-2022
> RC : 30-Nov-2022
> GA : 10-JAN-2023
>
> *Please evaluate the following and reply to this thread if you want to
> convey anything important:*
>
> - Can we ensure to fulfill all the proposed requirements by the Code
> Freeze?
> - Do we need to add any more changes to accommodate any shortcomings
> or improvements?
> - Are we all good to go with the proposed timeline?
>
>
 We have delayed the release already by more than 1year, and that is a
 significant delay for any project. If the changes we work on is not getting
 released frequently, the feedback loop for the project is delayed and hence
 the further improvements. So, regardless of any pending promised things, we
 should go ahead with the code-freeze and release on these dates.

 It is crucial for any projects / companies dependent on the project to
 plan accordingly. There may be already few others who would have planned
 their product release around these dates. Lets keep the same dates, and try
 to achieve the tasks we have planned in these dates.

>>>
>>> I agree. Pending changes will need to be added to next release. Doing it
>>> at last time is not safe for stability.
>>>
>>
>> Generally, +1.
>>
>> - Some info on my in-flight PRs:
>>
>> I have multiple independent patches for the flexible array member
>> conversion of different variables that are pending:
>> https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/pull/3873
>> https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/pull/3872
>> https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/pull/3868  (this one is
>> particularly interesting, I hope it works!)
>> https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/pull/3861
>> https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/pull/3870 (already in review,
>> perhaps it can get it soon?)
>>
>
> I'm already looking at these and I expect they can be merged before the
> current code-freeze date.
>
>
>> I have this for one for inode related code, which got some attention
>> recently:
>> https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/pull/3226
>>
>
> I'll try to review this one before code-freeze, but it requires much more
> care. Any help will be appreciated.
>
>
>>
>> I think this one is worthwhile looking at:
>> https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/pull/3854
>>
>
> I'll try to take a look at this one also.
>
>
>> I wish we could get rid of old, unsupported versions:
>> https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/pull/3544
>> (there's more to do, in different patches, but it's a start)
>>
>
> This one is mostly ok, but I think we can't release a new version without
> an explicit check for unsupported versions at least at the beginning, to
> avoid problems when users upgrade directly from 3.x to 11.x.
>
>
>> None of them is critical for release 11, though I'm unsure if I'll have
>> the ability to complete them later.
>>
>>
>> - The lack of EL9 official support (inc. testing infra.) is regrettable,
>> and I think something worth fixing *before* release 11 - adding sanity
>> on newer OS releases, which will use io_uring for example, is something we
>> should definitely consider.
>>
>> Lastly, I thought zstandard compression to the CDC xlator is interesting
>> for 11 (https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/pull/3841) - unsure if it's
>> ready for inclusion, but overall impact for stability should be low,
>> considered this is not a fully supported xlator anyway (and then
>> https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/pull/3835 should / could be
>> considered as well).
>>
>
> I already started the review but I'm not very familiarized with cdc and
> the compression libraries, so I'll need some more time.
>
>
>>
>> Last though:
>> If we are just time-based - sure, there's value in going forward and
>> releasing it - there are hundreds (or more) of great patches already
>> merged, I think there's value here.
>> If we wish to look at features and impactful changes to the users - I
>> suggest we review https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/issues/3023 , we
>> look at what's

[Gluster-devel] Gluster Code Metrics Weekly Report

2022-11-06 Thread sajmoham 

Gluster Code Metrics


Metrics Values

Clang Scan #VALUE!

Coverity 16

Line Cov

Func Cov


Trend Graph

Check the latest run:
Coverity Clang Code Coverage
---

Community Meeting Calendar:
Schedule -
Every 2nd and 4th Tuesday at 14:30 IST / 09:00 UTC
Bridge: https://meet.google.com/cpu-eiue-hvk

Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel

[Gluster-devel] [Smallfile-Replica-3] Performance report for Gluster Upstream - 07/11/2022 Test Status: PASS (5.18%)

2022-11-06 Thread Gluster-jenkins 


final.csv
Description: Binary data
---

Community Meeting Calendar:
Schedule -
Every 2nd and 4th Tuesday at 14:30 IST / 09:00 UTC
Bridge: https://meet.google.com/cpu-eiue-hvk

Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel