Based on the bug, I'd say that it passes distribution check because it's a feature compatibility error. Even SFT wouldn't have caught it unless there's a feature that pulls in both SFC and VBD at the same time and I don't think there is.
At this point, I think we either need somebody to get the patch to verify, cherry-picked and +2ed or we need to make the call that this isn't a critical feature and could be fixed in SR1. Given the nature of where we are, I'm inclined to say that option 2 is become more likely by the hour without a response from somebody who can actually drive the fix. --Colin On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 6:50 AM, Brady Allen Johnson < [email protected]> wrote: > > Apologies for the delay in replying to this, Ive been out sick since > Friday, and am still not feeling so hot today. > > Seems like that patch still doesnt verify. Im wondering what I can do to > help. Would it be worthwhile if I built a local distro and tested the > patch? Seems like I would just be repeating the verification being > performed on the patch. > > On that note, Im wondering why this problem wasnt detected in the > distribution check... Reproducing it is just a simple matter of installing > karaf features, which is mainly what the distribution check does. > > Please, let me know what I can do to help move this issue forward. > > Regards, > > Brady > > -----Original Message----- > *From*: Colin Dixon <[email protected] > <colin%20dixon%20%[email protected]%3e>> > *To*: An Ho <[email protected] <an%20ho%20%[email protected]%3e>>, Casey > Cain <[email protected] > <casey%20cain%20%[email protected]%3e>>, Robert Varga < > [email protected] <robert%20varga%20%[email protected]%3e>>, Vratko Polak -X (vrpolak > - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) <[email protected] > <%22vratko%20polak%20-x%20%28vrpolak%20-%20pantheon%20technologies%20at%20cisco%29%22%20%[email protected]%3e>>, > [email protected] <groupbasedpolicy-dev@lists. > opendaylight.org > <%[email protected]%22%20%[email protected]%3e>>, > [email protected] <[email protected] > <%[email protected]%22%20%[email protected]%3e>>, > [email protected] <[email protected] > <%[email protected]%22%20%[email protected]%3e>>, > [email protected] <[email protected] > <%[email protected]%22%20%[email protected]%3e> > > > *Subject*: Re: [sfc-dev] GROUPBASEDPOLICY SFC Carbon Blocker Bug > *Date*: Sun, 21 May 2017 18:27:44 +0000 > > The patch doesn't verify right now... if we can get it to verify, I can > probably turn up an MD-SAL committer. > > Also, from looking at Robert's last comment on the bug, it seems like this > might not be blocking in Carbon's first release. > > --Colin > > On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 2:24 PM An Ho <[email protected]> wrote: > > +MSDAL team because the fix seems to be in MDSAL project. > > > > We are looking to build Carbon RC3 tonight at 23:59 UTC 5/21/2017 assuming > there are no blocker bugs. Can someone cherry pick this patch [1] > stable/carbon and provide an ETA for when it can be merged for > stable/carbon branch? > > > > To better assess the impact of this bug and fix, could someone from your > team please help us identify the following: > > Regression: Is this bug a regression of functionality/performance/feature > compared to Boron? > > Severity: Could you elaborate on the severity of this bug? Is this a > BLOCKER such that we cannot release Carbon without it? > > Is there a workaround such that we can write a release note? > > Testing: Could you also elaborate on the testing of this patch? How > extensively has this patch been tested? Is it covered by any unit tests or > system tests? > > Impact: Does this fix impact any dependent projects? > > > > Best Regards, > > An Ho > > > > [1] https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/c/50683/ > > > > > > *From:* An Ho > *Sent:* Friday, May 19, 2017 1:45 PM > *To:* 'Brady Allen Johnson'; [email protected]; > [email protected]; '[email protected]'; Colin > Dixon; Casey Cain; '[email protected]' > *Subject:* RE: GROUPBASEDPOLICY SFC Carbon Blocker Bug > > > > Hi Vladimir Lavor and the GROUPBASEDPOLICY Team, Brady Johnson and the SFC > Team, > > > > Please take a moment to address the following blocker bug at this link [1] > by A) providing a patch fixing the blocker bug or B) providing an ETA when > a patch can be merged or C) retargeting the bug for NITROGEN or CARBON-SR1 > next month or D) downgrading the severity of the bug. > > > > We kindly remind your project that Carbon-RC3 is scheduled for Sunday 5/21 > at 23:59 UTC Time Zone. > > > > The TSC has set a very high bar for what constitutes a blocker bug after > Carbon-RC2 cutoff by requiring that projects identify real regression from > previous release or real end user impact. To better assess the impact of > this bug and fix, could someone from your team please help us identify the > following: > > > > Regression: Is this bug a regression of functionality/performance/feature > compared to Boron? > > Severity: Could you elaborate on the severity of this bug? Is this a > BLOCKER such that we cannot release Carbon without it? Is there a > workaround such that we can write a release note? > > Testing: Could you also elaborate on the testing of this patch? How > extensively has this patch been tested? Is it covered by any unit tests or > system tests? > > Impact: Does this fix impact any dependent projects? > > > > Best Regards, > > An Ho > > > > [1] https://bugs.opendaylight.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8501 Problem with the > installation of sfc, groupbasedpolicy, vbd related to vpp features > > > > *From:* Brady Allen Johnson [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Friday, May 19, 2017 6:44 AM > *To:* An Ho; [email protected]; > [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: SFC Carbon Blocker Bug > > > > > > Adding Group Based Policy. > > > > An, > > > > > > I knew about this problem during the Release Review yesterday, but thought > the bug was assigned to Group Based Policy (GBP) instead of SFC. > > > > The issue is, when installing a combination of Karaf features, there's a > serious crash. Just installing the SFC Karaf feature by itself works just > fine. > > > > I included the GBP folks to hopefully get the latest status on the > investigations. > > > > Regards, > > > > Brady > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > *From*: An Ho <[email protected] <an%20ho%20%[email protected]%3e>> > > *To*: Brady Allen Johnson <[email protected] > <brady%20allen%20johnson%20%[email protected]%3e>>, > sfc-dev opendaylight <[email protected] > <sfc-dev%20opendaylight%20%[email protected]%3e>> > > *Subject*: SFC Carbon Blocker Bug > > *Date*: Thu, 18 May 2017 21:50:31 +0000 > > > > Hi Brady Johnson and the SFC Team, > > > > At the Carbon Release Review, your project indicated that no blocker bugs > were found during RC1 testing. Could someone from your team please update > the following bug below. If appropriate, please feel free to retarget the > bug to Nitrogen or Carbon SR1 by setting the ODL_SR_TARGET_MILESTONE=NITROGEN > or CARBON-SR1. Please let us know if you have any concerns or upon further > analysis consider the bug to be blocking for the Carbon Simultaneous Release. > > > > https://bugs.opendaylight.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8501 Problem with the > installation of sfc, groupbasedpolicy, vbd related to vpp features > > > > Best Regards, > > An Ho > > > _______________________________________________ > sfc-dev mailing > [email protected]https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/sfc-dev > >
_______________________________________________ sfc-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/sfc-dev
