Maarten, your argument doesn't really hold up. A better APEL release has
been available since about the time 2_3_0 was released and has been used
in production by lots of sites although not in the release so it has
actually had better testing than the version in the release. Since the
version in 230 is buggy and is replaced manually immediately after
installation it would have made sense to include a later release in 231.
I didn't expect this since 231 is a 'security release' but it seems it
isn't really:-(
John
> -----Original Message-----
> From: LHC Computer Grid - Rollout
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Maarten
> Litmaath, CERN
> Sent: 17 March 2005 22:05
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [LCG-ROLLOUT] rgma going mad on 2.3.1
>
> On Mon, 14 Mar 2005, Burke, S (Stephen) wrote:
>
> > LHC Computer Grid - Rollout
> > > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mario
> David said:
> > > Of course my question which will remain "unanswered" for
> sure is Why
> > > LCG2.3.1 does not have this version??
>
> Because the RH7.3 rpms for that version were received only
> shortly before we decided what to put into the release.
> There was no time to test them, and we did not want to risk
> making things even worse.
>
> > Proably because it was just supposed to be a security patch
> release (I
> > think the APEL version in the release is also well out of date). Of
> > course, that didn't stop the lcg-* changes being introduced, even
> > though some things may be broken because they aren't fully backward
> > compatible ... it seems that CERN products get special treatment
> > compared with UK products!
>
> No. The lcg-utils simply had been tested during many weeks
> (+) and did not require any configuration changes. Their
> improvements were long overdue, so we decided we might as
> well lump them in.
>
> (+) With the certification test suite; unfortunately that did
> not catch
> the lcg-del bug exposed by the SFT.
>
|