Open Stack

Also, can https://review.openstack.org/#/c/163647<https://review.openstack.org/#/c/163647/2> be considered. all it does is move code from the accepted nfs.py to posix.py as described in the approved spec. This enables all posix complient file systems to be used, such as lustre instead of just nfs. It is already tested through the nfs tests.

The posix backup driver has been cooking in one form or another since Juno. It would be a shame to need to wait over a year and a half for it.

Thanks,
Kevin
________________________________
From: Duncan Thomas [duncan.thomas at gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2015 10:41 AM
To: Jay Bryant; OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] K3 Feature Freeze Exception request for bp/nfs-backup

Discussed in the weekly meeting, plenty of sponsors, agreed to try to get it through today

On 11 March 2015 at 18:48, Jay S. Bryant <jsbryant at electronicjungle.net<mailto:jsbryant at electronicjungle.net>> wrote:
All,

I will sponsor this.

Patch just needs to be rebased.

Jay


On 03/11/2015 10:20 AM, Tom Barron wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I hereby solicit a feature freeze exception for the NFS backup review [1].

Although only about 140 lines of non-test code, this review completes
the implementation of the NFS backup blueprint [2].  Most of the
actual work for this blueprint was a refactor of the Swift backup
driver to
abstract the backup/restore business logic from the use of the Swift
object store itself as the backup repository.  With the help of Xing
Yang, Jay Bryant, and Ivan Kolodyazhny, that review [3] merged
yesterday and made the K3 FFE deadline.

In evaluating this FFE request, please take into account the following
considerations:

    * Without the second review, the goal of the blueprint remains
      unfullfilled.

    * This code was upstream in January and was essentially complete
      with only superficial changes since then.

    * As of March 5 this review had two core +2s.  Delay since then has
      been entirely due to wait time on the dependent review and need
      for rebase given upstream code churn.

    * No risk is added outside NFS backup service itself since the
      changes to current code are all in the core refactor and that
      is already merged.

If this FFE is granted, I will give the required rebase my immediate
attention.

Thanks.

- --
Tom Barron
tpb at dyncloud.net<mailto:tpb at dyncloud.net>

[1] - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/149726
[2] - https://blueprints.launchpad.net/cinder/+spec/nfs-backup
[3] - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/149725
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVAF1YAAoJEGeKBzAeUxEHayUH/2iWuOiKBnRauX40fwcR7+js
lIM+qRIHlg2iJ+cnqap6HHUhBSxwHnuAV41zQmFBKnfhc3sIqS98ZSVlUaJQtct/
YjjInKOpxFOEw1FgoFMsrg0qm76zFMXXVIKNegy2iXgXsKzDTWed5n57N8FAP2+6
q/uASOZNHgxbeZLV7LSKS21/3WUoQpIQiW0+1GtkVtO1C9t8Io+TrjlZj7T60kHJ
UEH5HShKE0U40SKhgwRyEK7HqbMDGv8w5SsUgyUntdgDlQycgyI/erKm5WJqcZsF
F6om6HY3oxtulcjbrWmA6+ENnOYsLchXFT8fZeLj7JWOarv5SF2fBQFTqzc/36U=
=/FVr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe<http://OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe<http://OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev



--
Duncan Thomas
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150312/a57d71af/attachment.html>