xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: xfsprogs 3.0.5 "release"

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: xfsprogs 3.0.5 "release"
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:37:50 -0500
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, nathans@xxxxxxxxxx, vapier@xxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20091025070331.GA21120@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20091025070331.GA21120@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Macintosh/20090812)
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
It looks like SGI rushed out a 3.0.5 xfsprogs release which contains
various half-cooked changes including additions to shared libraries
without bumping the minor version and wrong patch attributions.

I can only recommend to not pick it up for distributions and wait for a
proper release from the kernel.org trees after the full release
engineering process has finished.  The current plan is to have a release
end of Novemeber, we'll have to figure out the naming / numbering to not
clash with the SGI versions.

Alex did ping me about doing a release, and I didn't complain, so sorry about that. I hadn't really looked in detail at what was in the tree, and the library change totally escaped me.

So Alex isn't working in a total vacuum, but he consulted a total air-head I guess. ;)

Let's work to fix the trees and give Alex another shot; I understand the frusttation with SGI, and I share it, for constantly putting new (new as in "green") maintainers in place, but I think Alex is doing his best on short notice.

Anyway I share some of the blame, let's not go for the nuclear option yet, if there's still a little patience left on your part, Christoph.

I do feel like if time goes by and SGI's only role continues to be playing patch-monkey by pulling others' changes into their tree, that's not maintaining, an we should just cut releases on our own... but I'm willing to give it a little more time, based on what I know of Alex's interest & abilities here.

Thanks,
-Eric

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>