Mailing-List: contact cloudstack-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <61AE1E2837A06D4A8E98B796183842D401292FD2DFCA@SJCPMAILBOX01.citrite.net>
References: 
 <CA+96GG7AOBifK-WGGMkbd3oo+wPsc4kNm=zSLsESNjWXs0bgBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <53AEFEE9DD31EF42ADDDAD0125BCD52DD726AC2EC8@LONPMAILBOX01.citrite.net>
 <6005BE083BF501439A84DC3523BAC82DE44D7E43EC@LONPMAILBOX01.citrite.net>
 <8958392355476010626@unknownmsgid>
 <6005BE083BF501439A84DC3523BAC82DE44D7E43EF@LONPMAILBOX01.citrite.net>
 <61AE1E2837A06D4A8E98B796183842D401292FD2DFCA@SJCPMAILBOX01.citrite.net>
From: David Nalley <david@gnsa.us>
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2012 23:40:34 -0400
Message-ID: 
 <CAKprHVYNoGRH0Pwr5w1qE6YeLGsQ02gtiuS_ZuMqZk_7GE3eNw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Release Management Process
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 9:27 PM, Will Chan <will.chan@citrix.com> wrote:
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+Release+Checklist
>
> Ewan, thanks the release plan.  A couple of questions since I wasn't sure if the goal is to include them in the release:
>
> 1. I don't see the Netscaler AutoScaling feature merge into master.  Has that been done already or we are not going to include it?
>
> 2. Would 4.0 include upgrade from 3.0.2?  If not, when would we support this?  If so, has anyone even checked to see if this was even possible?


A couple of issues with NetScaler support in general at the moment.
It hasn't been relicensed, so it is still proprietary and I've gotten
no response on the emails asking for status updates. I have no idea
where to even get the jars from.

Last email I saw on the autoscale topic from Ewan suggested that it
wasn't ready and wouldn't be by code freeze.

As for upgrade, I didn't honestly think that was a question. We have
thousands of CloudStack deployments, and since we are doing time based
releases, telling them to effectively wait 9 months to a year since
their last update doesn't sound reasonable. (E.g. if it's not now,
it's 4.1 - which is several months at a minimum after 4.0 is
released). IMO we ought never have a release that doesn't support
upgrades.

--David