cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pranav Saxena <pranav.sax...@citrix.com>
Subject RE: [DISCUSS] - Deletion of Users within the Admin account
Date Mon, 22 Apr 2013 20:51:41 GMT
I second that ! we could leave it in master then .

-----Original Message-----
From: Alena Prokharchyk [mailto:Alena.Prokharchyk@citrix.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2013 2:10 AM
To: Chip Childers
Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] - Deletion of Users within the Admin account

On 4/22/13 1:36 PM, "Chip Childers" <chip.childers@sungard.com> wrote:

>On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 01:33:32PM -0700, Alena Prokharchyk wrote:
>> On 4/22/13 12:29 PM, "Chip Childers" <chip.childers@sungard.com> wrote:
>> 
>> >On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 07:25:53PM +0000, Pranav Saxena wrote:
>> >> If we don't , then the only trade-off is the deletion of the users 
>> >>accounts won't be possible :) . IMHO , we should be allowing  that .
>> >> 
>> >> I'll leave it upto you to take a final go at it .
>> >
>> >Tell you what...  why don't you go ahead and back port it.  If it 
>> >happens to get into 4.1.0, then great.  Otherwise it'll be in 4.1.1.
>> >
>> 
>> Chip, the fix includes the DB upgrade - adding the "default" field to  
>>user/account DB tables. I've already made changes to 4.1-4.2 upgrade 
>>path  on master. If we backport the fix to 4.1 branch, where the db 
>>upgrade  steps should go? As we don't know yet whether it becomes 
>>4.1.1 or 4.1.0  yet.
>> 
>> -Alena.
>> 
>> 
>
>Hmmm...  well we have been trying to *not* do schema changes for 
>bug-fix releases.
>
>If things worked this way for 4.0.x, I don't see any reason to jump on 
>pushing this into 4.1.x ATM.  Perhaps we just leave it in master then.
>
>Others?
>


+1. Especially when it includes DB changes.


Mime
View raw message