Please backport frontier_client 2.8.19 and pacparser 1.3.5 to older CMSSW release lines

[DrDaveD]

frontier_client 2.8.18 and pacparser 1.3.5 is in CMSSW_8_1_0_pre[12] and hasn't seen any problems. Please start backporting it to older release lines that still expect to see active use for quite a while, as was attempted for version 2.8.14 in issue #1952.

[cmsbuild]

A new Issue was created by @DrDaveD .

@davidlange6, @smuzaffar, @Degano, @davidlt, @Dr15Jones can you please review it and eventually sign/assign? Thanks.

cms-bot commands are list here cms-sw/cmssw#13029

[DrDaveD]

A small problem was found with 2.8.18 -- hold the backport a while until 2.8.19 is tested in as requested in issue #2245

[smuzaffar]

@DrDaveD , are you happy with 2.8.19? @Degano has created a PR #2289 for 80X, let us know if this is good to go in 80X?

We are planing to test 2.8.19 on online machines using CMSSW_8_1_0_pre4/5 and based on your input and tests we can go ahead with its back port to 80X.

[DrDaveD]

Yes I am happy with 2.8.19. Please do go ahead and backport frontier client 2.8.19 and pacparser 1.3.5 to 80X

[DrDaveD]

This is now in 8_0_10. What other older release lines should be considered to be upgraded for IPv6 support?

[ghost]

@DrDaveD It really depends if the scope of frontier_client in CMSSW goes beyond the online data processing. Releases of the 7 (or earlier) cycles are nowadays only used for analysis AFAIK.

[davidlange6]

yes, frontier is beyond the online - we have an ipv6 discussion Friday, so it will be easier to answer the question after that.

On Jun 8, 2016, at 3:08 PM, Alessandro Degano notifications@github.com wrote:

@DrDaveD It really depends if the scope of frontier_client in CMSSW goes beyond the online data processing. Releases of the 7 (or earlier) cycles are nowadays only used for analysis AFAIK.

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[DrDaveD]

I see it was backported to CMSSW_7_1_24. That was #2337

[ghost]

@iahmad-khan what's the status on the various PRs that you have created? Can you merge those working and fixing those that doesn't?

[iahmad-khan]

@Degano yes , those that have succeeded can be merged and the one that fails in addons can also be merged for the same reasons as that of 7_1_X has been merged but i am not sure whether should i do it or not(in case of 5_3_X)

[iahmad-khan]

Fixed in #2337 , #2338 , #2340