[cdwg] Reminder - OpenSFS CDWG call tomorrow, 7/12, at 8:30am Pacific

[Cory Spitz]

Hi,

> Therefore the discussion for the call [tomorrow, 7/12] is to discuss a process for coming to consensus regarding the next maintenance release.

As Pam noted, the current contract doesn't maintenance branches, so in
terms of the (current) contract, I don't think that it is right for the
CDWG to expect that Whamcloud would follow any given recommendation.
Having said that, I think that we should have the discussion anyway with
the thought that Whamcloud is looking for that input :)  That's what the
previous surveys were for too.

It's also clear to me that we should think about changing the next
contract to cover maintenance branches in some manner.  Clearly we, as a
community, care deeply about it.  Maybe we could entertain a discussion
about a so-called "tick-tock" model too.  That is a big topic, so I
propose that we tackle it in an upcoming meeting.  That is, not tomorrow.

Another topic I'd like to raise for a future discussion is quality
metrics for the feature releases.  We haven't formally defined any and I
think that we should take a stab at it.  I realize that it doesn't do
any good without more test commitments and also that we haven't all
chipped in on testing as much as we wanted in the past.  Maybe this is
where the discussion on funding test enhancements come in, but I think
that there are other options to explore in the meantime.  We'll need to
figure out how to leverage the OpenSFS test cluster too.

Thanks,
-Cory

On 07/11/2012 03:49 PM, Hamilton, Pam wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> This is a reminder that we will have a call tomorrow, July 12th, at 8:30am Pacific (Call-in: 866-914-3976 (925-424-8105) Passcode: 534986#).
> 
> Agenda:
> .	Discuss a process for coming to consensus regarding the next maintenance release
> 
> Background:
> There has been a lot of discussion lately on the mail lists about Lustre maintenance releases and how it is determined which "feature" release gets additional maintenance releases. There is also confusion with regard to maintenance releases and the Community Tree maintenance contract. The contract specifically states:
> 
> "Ongoing Lustre development requires periodic Lustre feature releases which are fully tested and qualified Lustre releases featuring the latest code (both features and bugfixes) from the master codeline (git://git.opensfs.org / fs/lustre-release.git). It is expected that feature releases should occur roughly every six months. These are distinct from Lustre maintenance releases, which are funded by support contracts."
> 
> Basically, "maintenance" releases for each feature release are not covered by this contract and would not be feasible at the approximately four FTEs this contract funds. That being said, the CDWG is in a position to draft a recommendation regarding a long term support strategy for releases. Personally, I agree with Andreas Dilger who recommends that an Ubuntu-style "Long Term Stability" regular release strategy should be our goal. It is simply impossible in terms of resources to consider that each six-month feature release will have its own series of maintenance releases. 
> 
> Furthermore, to aid sites in planning for Lustre upgrade paths, we should decide on what will be the next LTS release well in advance of its actual release date. 
> 
> Therefore the discussion for the call today is to discuss a process for coming to consensus regarding the next maintenance release.
> 
> Regards,
> Pam
> 
> ___________________________________
> Pam Hamilton
> Lawrence Livermore National Lab 
> P.O. Box 808, L-556
> Livermore, CA  94551-9900
> E-Mail:  pgh at llnl.gov
> Phone:  925-423-1332          Fax:  925-423-8719
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cdwg mailing list
> cdwg at lists.opensfs.org
> http://lists.opensfs.org/listinfo.cgi/cdwg-opensfs.org