Since this wont be fixed for Carbon, I added info about it to the SFC Carbon release notes (which havent been merged yet):
https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/57284 Regards, Brady -----Original Message----- From: Colin Dixon <[email protected]<mailto:colin%20dixon%20%[email protected]%3e>> To: Robert Varga <[email protected]<mailto:robert%20varga%20%[email protected]%3e>> Cc: Brady Allen Johnson <[email protected]<mailto:brady%20allen%20johnson%20%[email protected]%3e>>, [email protected] <[email protected]<mailto:%[email protected]%22%20%[email protected]%3e>>, [email protected] <[email protected]<mailto:%[email protected]%22%20%[email protected]%3e>>, [email protected] <[email protected]<mailto:%[email protected]%22%20%[email protected]%3e>>, [email protected] <[email protected]<mailto:%[email protected]%22%20%[email protected]%3e>>, [email protected] <[email protected]<mailto:%[email protected]%22%20%[email protected]%3e>>, [email protected] <[email protected]<mailto:%[email protected]%22%20%[email protected]%3e>>, [email protected] <[email protected]<mailto:%[email protected]%22%20%[email protected]%3e>> Subject: Re: [sfc-dev] GROUPBASEDPOLICY SFC Carbon Blocker Bug Date: Mon, 22 May 2017 10:05:06 -0400 I that case, I think that this is a valid RC3 build: https://jenkins.opendaylight.org/releng/view/autorelease/job/autorelease-release-carbon/327/ I'll let An deal with the formalities when he's conscious and we have the Carbon release sync in just under an hour. --Colin On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 9:43 AM, Robert Varga <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: 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
_______________________________________________ sfc-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/sfc-dev
