cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Animesh Chaturvedi <>
Subject RE: [ACS41] Concerns about where development has happened
Date Mon, 14 Jan 2013 19:32:23 GMT
Ok  to summarize for 306 we will not revert the changes at this time because of technical issues.
306 will still have to go through the IP clearance process and will be dropped if it does
not pass the clearance. Please expect a separate thread on IP clearance for 306 once Sheng
posts the code.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chip Childers []
> Sent: Monday, January 14, 2013 11:02 AM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [ACS41] Concerns about where development has happened
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Alex Huang <> wrote:
> >
> >> I thought that we had agreed that Chiradeep's network refactoring was
> >> going to merge into master first, and he's waiting for the reverts
> >> before doing his merge.  Alex (others), what's your opinion?
> >>
> > Chip,
> >
> > We've looked at the effects from the reverts on javelin.  I think the main
> problem is the commits for bug 306.  This one is particularly bad because its
> fixes are intertwined now with the api_refactoring merge and it's difficult to
> for us to see a way out of this one.  We like to ask the community for an
> exception for this bug on technical reasons for this one problem.  I talked with
> Chiradeep and he's okay with that as well for the network refactoring branch.
> >
> > If for some reason the fixes for this bug cannot pass ip clearance then we'll
> just have to deal with it.
> >
> > All the other reverts, we're fine with absorbing in javelin.
> I can accept that, as long as we all understand that we can't release any code
> from master (or any other branch that includes those commits) until that code
> has been accepted via IP clearance.  We're just talking about CLOUDSTACK-306
> commits though, right?  If we don't pass the IP clearance process for that code,
> then we will have to stop until we get it pulled out.  Hopefully that won't
> happen though.
> For the CLOUDSTACK-312 commits, any update on reverting them Murali?
> > --Alex
> >

View raw message