On 22/05/17 15:36, Colin Dixon wrote: > 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.
I think we can postpone it -- the patch is an attempt at fixing the problem, but I think it was just a first stab will follow-up patches needed afterwards... Bye, Robert
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ sfc-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/sfc-dev
