[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Time for an xfsprogs "alpha1" release?

To: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Time for an xfsprogs "alpha1" release?
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 17:18:31 -0500
Cc: "'linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx'" <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <5232380E.4040300@xxxxxxx>
References: <52322F7A.8060405@xxxxxxxxxxx> <5232380E.4040300@xxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8
On 9/12/13 4:54 PM, Mark Tinguely wrote:
> On 09/12/13 16:17, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> With all of the changes for CRC filesystems in xfsprogs git now, I'm 
>> wondering if it'd be a good idea to do a "3.2.0-alpha1" sort of release.
>> I know it's not yet feature complete, but I think there would be value in 
>> getting a version-stamped tarball out there for testing - it could filter to 
>> rawhide-ish distros, and get a bit more airtime while the remaining bits get 
>> worked out.
>> We'd probably want a nice readme about what's new and what's not yet done, 
>> caveats, etc, but I think it'd be worth getting it out there into the hands 
>> of willing testers, w/o requiring them to do a build from git.
>> Thoughts?
>> Thanks,
>> -Eric
> Good idea, but xfsprogs is in a state that it can't compile:
>    http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2013-09/msg00396.html
> Patch 31 v3 / 55 is broken. It is missing xfs_sb.c and has an extra
> xfs_mount.c.
> If you want it this week, we could do the corrections or wait for Dave
> to repost.

hm? The git tree builds fine here, anyway (modulo some warnings).

so quick, cut an alpha1 before it breaks.  ;)

(but if you mean: we should get the latest stuff on the list in first,
and fix it so it builds - ok - but there will probably always be more
stuff to pull in, so at some point when we have a reasonable amount of it
in place, we could cut a test release?  There's always "alpha2"...)


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