Comment # 4 on bug 986172 from Lee Duncan

(In reply to Roger Zhou from comment #3)
> It is great to know this bug was fixed in Factory. 
> 
> However, I would incline to reopen this since openSUSE Leap is not fixed
> indeed. Further thinking, it might be worth a discussion with Lee Duncan for
> our position in Leap. The question can be:
> 
> - Whether we incline to be more aggressive to suggest Leap 42.2 Release
> Manager to use targetcli 3.0 in Factory, or be more safe and conservative to
> stay with targetcli 2.1 the same as SLE?
> 
> - Also, other than this, in the end of Jun, upstream had moved 3.0 into
> github/open-iscsi/targetcli-fb. It makes sense to repackage this instead of
> Datera repo. 
> 
> 
> @Lee, What do you think?

Hi Roger:

I am not aware of the goals of Leap 42.2, i.e. whether they want to be
conservative, as SLE is, or take chances on new packages as Factory does.

I believe the targetcli-3.0 stuff is a much better version than the 2.1
version, and very stable. The targetcli-fb group of packages is fairly new so
I'd like to see it get some use in Factory and SLE 12 SP2 before we replace
targetcli (and friends). So I suggest adding targetcli-fb and friends to 42.2
as an option, if there is still time. But I think the targetcli there should be
updated to 3.0-pre4, as per factory.

Also, what is the procedure for getting things in Leap? I was under the
impression we just put updates in Factory and they magically migrated to Leap
at some time in the future. I'm guessing now that is incorrect.