[cgl_discussion] [CGLE 1.0] Release Coordination Meeting Minu tes - 8/29/02

Peddibhotla, Rammohan rammohan.peddibhotla at intel.com
Fri Aug 30 16:26:19 PDT 2002


Lisa and I have been tracking the submissions offline with project 
maintainers since yesterday's meeting. There are 4 items that are currently
open and sanity check submissions for 3 of them are currently being worked 
on..Hence the 'on track' characterization.

There are outstanding ARs for all issues that are raised below. 

  - Crypto: is an AR for Mika and Venkat. Based on discussion in the meeting
    this might be a non-issue.

  - patch/code descrepancy: this effects only evlog and Tariq has the AR to
put 
    the correct patch in the /patches directory
 
  - Incomplete maintainer submissions: I'm don't believe there are any
current
    opens here (most of the issues such as IPv6 patch etc were resolved
offline 
    yesterday). Are there any specifics that you are aware of?

  - App heartbeat: PoC decided to keep the implementation

I'm not sure I understand your question on opening the code base.
Release coordination meeting made the decision to open the repository 
understanding that the above ARs are not completed. I'd rather not revisit 
decisions unless there is new/material data.

Ram

-----Original Message-----
From: John Cherry [mailto:cherry at osdl.org]
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 3:50 PM
To: Peddibhotla, Rammohan
Cc: 'cgl_proof_subgroup at osdl.org'; 'cgl_valid_subgroup at osdl.org';
'cgl_tech_board at osdl.org'; 'cgl_discussion at osdl.org'
Subject: Re: [cgl_discussion] [CGLE 1.0] Release Coordination Meeting
Minutes - 8/29/02



> 
> Summary of Discussion:
> ==================
> 
> - Milestone M2 (due 8/30):
>    * Sanity check is in full swing and on track. 

There are a couple of things that put the "on track" status in
jeophardy.  There were 10 items that did not have maintainer responses
yet.  I believe only two more have come in since Wednesday.  As we
discussed, this probably means that the view opens on Tuesday and the
maintainers that have not responded will not have access to the
repository.  As far as I know, the issues that you brought out are still
outstanding as well...

   - inclusion of cryptographic code
   - some patch/code discrepencies
   - some incomplete maintainer submissions
   - closure on application heartbeat implementation (this may be
     done, but not public yet)

Should we open the repository before the patch/code discrepencies are
resolved?  I would suggest that view consistency should be our highest
priority right now.  Opening the view would remove that focus.

John



More information about the cgl_discussion mailing list