cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chip Childers <>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Raise cluster size limit to 16 on VMware
Date Wed, 06 Feb 2013 17:00:23 GMT
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 08:49:39AM -0800, Alex Huang wrote:
> I've cced Chip in case he knows this was decided already.
> To me reviewboard not being committed to 4.1 is a problem with the community following
up on patches and not with the original submit of the patch.  The submitter obviously submitted
the patch in time (some has been there for a long time) so should we make it an exception
for review board submits that made it in time to make it into the release?  
> If not, then next release we should set a deadline for review board patches earlier than
feature freeze deadline. 
> --Alex 

We didn't decide this yet, but IMO it's an unfortunate but necessary
situation for us to not include this feature in 4.1.  

We really need to get much better about being responsive to reviewboard 
submissions.  That being said, I still believe that the freeze is against 
the state of master.

As an example, there were several ongoing discussions around different 
features that lead to the patches not making it into the release in time 
already.  The reason that we want to have a cutoff date is to make sure 
that we have a chance of actually testing and stabilizing on a reasonable 

The best advice I have for us, is that feature submissions need to
happen as soon as possible, so that reviews can commence and issues can
be sorted out.  Incrementally showing progress and getting reviews from
the community should happen throughout the feature dev process.

Don't forget the reason for time-based releases is that features can
simply be in the *next release*.

Lots of things need to improve, but my (unfortunate perhaps) vote is
that freeze means just that.  We froze features for the release branch
based on what was actually in master.


View raw message