[Twg] [Rpwg] Ideas for consideration

[James A Simmons]

> 1)  Create a branch named "2.0.59.0-opensfs" on github, which is based
> at Oracle's 2.0.59.0 tag.  This is a "pre-release" version on the
> branch that will be tagged 2.1 by Oracle in the next few months.

Or we could use 

https://github.com/rread/lustre

We should avoid having multiple lustre branches on github. Of course the
chaos version is also on github but that is very special branch that has
existed for a long time. I have noticed that Oracle is allowing people
that left to still check into their source tree.

> 2)  We create a "opensfs-devel" mailing list, where Lustre developers
> and testers can communicate and coordinate their efforts.

Yes please do. My experince is that this list usually becomes the main
list where everyone post to. We talked about having one main mailing
list before. This could easily fill in that gap.

> 3)  When we discover bugs, we can initially use github's built-in
> issue tracking, or just use bugzilla.lustre.org, and agree to make all
> OpenSFS bugs dependants of a master OpenSFS tracking bug.  The
> developers can work out the details amongst themselves on
> opensfs-devel.

The hope is only one bugzilla will exist for lustre. If the bugzilla
goes away at oracle then we use the github issue tracker. If not someone
can easily create a OpenSFS ticket at bugzilla.lustre.org. ORNL as well
as livermore have their own trackers already there.

> We have a volunteer who is willing to be the initial gatekeeper for
> the OpenSFS 2.1 release if there are no objections, or unless better
> candidates volunteer. Whoever the gatekeeper is needs to maintain the
> fairly rigorous processes developed at Oracle to maintain quality and
> reliability in both development and production branches.

That is good news. If we go with the lustre tree on github that already
exit then the gate keeper will have to be giving access to that tree.

> Another idea which could be launched quickly is to put out an RFP to
> do an investigation into Btrfs and its use as a possible backend file
> system for Lustre. This wouldn’t involve any code development. The
> primary deliverable for this contract would be a report.

I can't believe it's not Btr :->