cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chip Childers <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS][ASFCS40] Status of getting to a 4.0.0 release?
Date Mon, 08 Oct 2012 13:50:40 GMT
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 9:13 AM, sebgoa <> wrote:
> On Oct 8, 2012, at 2:56 PM, Chip Childers wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> It appears to have been a busy weekend for many of us, so I wanted to
>> start a quick discuss thread to see where the community thinks we
>> stand regarding a 4.0.0 release VOTE.  With Alex headed out on
>> vacation after today, he asked if I could take over the release
>> management roll this week (of course, if someone has an objection to
>> that, feel free to shout!).
>> Here were the outstanding issues that I noted from last week.  Perhaps
>> we can get updates from the various community members working on the
>> items?
>> CLOUDSTACK-257: AWS Api is not correctly deployed
>> The bug is marked as resolved right now, but that there is still some
>> activity on the bug to get it to closure.  Can someone please comment
>> on the status of this work?
> Chip, I went through the whole testing procedure for 4.0.0.beta6 and everything worked
fine, I also built marvin and configure devcloud with it.
> I then tried to test ec2/s3 and indeed there was an issue with the user registration
for AWS. I can test it again with a new build.
> -Sebastien

Thanks for the followup Sebastien!  I think that CLOUDSTACK-257 is
close to being resolved now.

>> CLOUDSTACK-267: Migration of VM in KVM host is not happening because...
>> Edison, you marked this bug as closed and that it was fixed in
>> c8afd816965786441e4b6f855b141d7515f15f6a.  Was this patch applied to
>> the 4.0 branch?  If so, should we update the fix version to be 4.0.0?
>> If not, should it be applied to 4.0?
>> Release Notes and CHANGES file:
>> Radhika asked a couple of questions on another thread, which need to
>> be answered.  Can someone point me to the draft content, so that I can
>> create a CHANGES file more easily?  Personally, I'm OK with getting
>> the more formal release notes completed (and posted to our website)
>> during the voting process.  It would have been better to have wrapped
>> all of the docs for the release as part of the release itself (since
>> it's in the source tree), but as long as we post it as soon as
>> possible on the website we'll be OK.
>> I would also suggest that we consider a 4.0.1 release that includes
>> the completed docs (and nothing else).  I think that once we get
>> ourselves through our first official release process, we shouldn't be
>> shy with releasing new minor updates.
>> Last, if there are any other concerns / outstanding items / thoughts
>> that people want to share, please do.  I'd love to be in a position to
>> cut an actual 4.0.0 release candidate today, and start the VOTE
>> thread.  However, we want to be sure that we've buttoned up as much as
>> possible.
>> -chip

View raw message