[cdwg] [wc-discuss] Lustre 2.2.0 released

[Christopher J. Morrone]

It sounds to me like the decision to not mark the issue a blocker is 
reasonable give the information I have seen (i.e., only and issue with 
debug kernels).  While a panic is more likely to be a blocker, it should 
not necessarily be a guarantee.  We do need to consider other factors, 
and holding to our release schedule is important.

It would be fairly easy to delay releases for untold months if a panic 
automatically blocked releases.  A panic that will effect all production 
users should obviously be a blocker.  A panic that only effects a 
development environment with a debug kernel is not automatically a blocker.

I think that it would have been helpful to record that decision in the 
ticket.  Otherwise the Alexey and the rest of us have little visibility 
into the process, which can lead to unnecessary frustration.

Chris

On 03/30/2012 09:42 AM, Peter Jones wrote:
> Alexey
>
> I am sorry if my explanation was not clear enough.
>
> The decision was taken to not classify this as a blocker because the issue only occurs when running kernel debug options.
>
> The engineers in the triage process considered this not to be a common scenario for production usage.
>
> As such it was decided it would be better to have the release be on time for the majority and know that anyone needing to run kernel debug options would be able to apply a simple patch to do so.
>
> The kind of logic applied to determining blockers for Lustre releases has been unchanged for many years.
>
> Regards
>
> Peter