cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From John Burwell <>
Subject Re: [MERGE][ACS41] javelin to master
Date Mon, 28 Jan 2013 21:42:30 GMT

I mentioned to Chip on IRC that the biggest challenge for me is that there is not a unit test
suite that we can run before and after the merge to verify it.  Therefore, until we expand
our unit test coverage, merges of structural changes such as javelin will carry an inherently
higher risk.


On Jan 28, 2013, at 2:48 PM, Chip Childers <> wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Alex Huang <> wrote:
>>> Obviously that doesn't answer the question for this release, and I
>>> think John's question is a good one. What benefits does 4.1 accrue
>>> from landing javelin at this point? Obviously after code freeze no new
>>> features get to make it in, so from a feature standpoint, if it isn't
>>> directly enabled or can be within one day, I am not sure what the
>>> point is.
>> One consideration is that 4.1 is shaping up to be low on features (other than the
ones on ip clearance which generally have already been qaed on account that they've been released).
 The new storage engine getting the benefits of 2 months of QA by itself (assuming Edison's
hookup code makes it into 4.1) is actually a good thing.  I'm less concerned about Spring
part as it has low risk in what it affects.
>> Edison in writing the new storage stuff also attempted to add a standard for integration
testing.  It would be good to get evals from everyone on if it is enough.
>> --Alex
> Alex - I'm specifically concerned about getting the pending features
> into master.  Does merging Javelin (1) not impact those pending
> features, and (2) is it a pre-requisite to any pending features?
> What's the harm in merging into master immediately after the 4.1
> branch is cut?  That would seem like the optimal time to have changes
> like this hit master.
> Thoughts?

View raw message