[OpenAFS] rxk5 Mainline Issues?
Matt W. Benjamin
Sat, 7 Nov 2009 12:07:35 -0500 (EST)
I don't think Marcus' remark was meant to be disingenuous, but, in any case=
. Simon and I discussed some of the issues yesterday via XMPP. We agree t=
here are lots of things Marcus and I can do, but a lot of things become eas=
ier and more useful to do when upstream is ready start thinking about rxk5 =
in detail. Simon pointed out that once 1.6 branches, rxk5 patches can flow=
onto head--and that means that folks can start reviewing changes for poten=
tial merge. Even if it takes a while to get through them, that's the most =
efficient process to be on, and the sooner we can start it, the more produc=
tive we can be.
----- "Derrick Brashear" <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Marcus Watts
> <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >> Marcus has also summarised the issues to the afs3-stds list, along
> >> with his feelings of how desirable / achievable each feature might
> >> tober/000512.html
> >> (There are additional issues, beyond those from the hackathon, on
> >> list - in particular, many sites indiciated at the Rome Workshop
> >> a flag day transition to rxk5 would not be achievable for them)
> >> S.
> > I should comment a bit about timeline.
> > At the hackathon, it turns out the openafs gatekeepers have a
> > whereby 1.6 comes out in "6 months", and nothing regarding improved
> > security mechanisms can happen "to the mainline" before then. =C2=A0So
> > schedule has nothing to do with rxk5; it's an absolute constraint.
> Apparently code revision system branches were invented recently or
> something. You should check them out. They're awesome.
> with equivalent disingenuous skills to the next guy
> OpenAFS-info mailing list
The Linux Box
206 South Fifth Ave. Suite 150
Ann Arbor, MI 48104