cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sean Truman <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Should we pause merges into master until 4.1 is out the door?
Date Wed, 22 May 2013 00:54:48 GMT
I completely agree but when does features an enhancements come before QA an overall stability
of a product? I guess it all depends on customers base.


On May 21, 2013, at 7:28 PM, Chiradeep Vittal <> wrote:

> There's ALWAYS known issues in every release. The release manager,
> developers, support (in this case developers), product managers (in this
> case community at large) and customers (users) at some point put the value
> of getting new code and new features ahead of fixing ALL known issues.
> I suggest that that point is NOW. But that is just my opinion.
> On 5/21/13 5:12 PM, "Sean Truman" <> wrote:
>> All,
>> I would prefer a better release an wait for it then to have to deal with
>> multiple updates because of issues, just my $.02..
>> Sean
>> On May 21, 2013, at 7:00 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
>> <> wrote:
>>> But the longer we hold the window open for folks to raise defects, the
>>> longer it will take to release. Why can't we enforce our own timelines
>>> and
>>> say "this is it". Any release will have blockers for a subset of users.
>>> It
>>> seems to me that we are inefficient in estimating the harm from a
>>> 'blocker' defect -- I.e., the defect is assumed to affect 100% of the
>>> users and therefore blocks the release. There's always 4.1.1
>>> On 5/21/13 2:20 PM, "David Nalley" <> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 4:18 PM, Chip Childers
>>>> <> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 12:34:45AM +0000, Chiradeep Vittal wrote:
>>>>>> I don't see limited interest. It seems that bugs are trickling in
>>>>>> every
>>>>>> day and they are being taken up as they come in. Is there any blocker
>>>>>> without any action for more than a few days? The only one I can see
>>>>>> CLOUDSTACK-2463.
>>>>> Chiradeep,
>>>>> My response to Animesh was flippant and not overly helpful. You are
>>>>> correct that things are being addressed.  My point was more that the
>>>>> community in general seems to have moved on from 4.1, yet we have not
>>>>> released it yet.  Bugs that have come up are taking several requests
>>>>> for
>>>>> attention, and once there is a reply it's frequently taking several
>>>>> requests
>>>>> to get follow ups.  This is a volunteer project, so that alone isn't
>>>>> the
>>>>> issue.  I raise the question about what to do about 4.1 in the
>>>>> interest
>>>>> of asking the rest of the community if you have, indeed, moved on and
>>>>> want to focus on 4.2 instead.
>>>>> Others,
>>>>> I'm frankly surprised at how few people have responded to this thread,
>>>>> given the volume of commit / merge / jira activity going on for new
>>>>> features.
>>>>> Obviously there is lots of effort going into new feature dev, so it's
>>>>> not at
>>>>> all like we have stopped paying attention to the project as a
>>>>> community
>>>>> (far from it).
>>>>> As for the current state of consensus around my questions:
>>>>> * Animesh indicated a desire to keep moving on both fronts.
>>>>> * Prasanna indicated his concern that changes in master are being
>>>>> missed
>>>>> by people looking at 4.1.
>>>>> * John indicated his concern about the priority conflict WRT
>>>>> stabilizing
>>>>> 4.2 and 4.1 concurrently.
>>>>> * Chiradeep - I know you replied to this thread (obviously), but I'm
>>>>> not
>>>>> sure if I saw an answer to the questions I raised (although you make
>>>>> a
>>>>> fair point, which I address above).
>>>>> I'm looking for more feedback one way or the other here.
>>>>> -chip
>>>> So here's my thoughts - and I apologize if this seems like a rant.
>>>> The goal of the project is to release code. It's the cornerstone of
>>>> much of what we do. We've done a very good job in my opinion of making
>>>> CloudStack consumable by people who are comfortable hacking on the
>>>> source code. We have a number of people running versions of CloudStack
>>>> that have never been released yet, and doing so pretty confidently.
>>>> Most of our target audience is either not comfortable doing that, or
>>>> not comfortable running something in production that hasn't been
>>>> blessed as a release, and doesn't have a known upgrade path.
>>>> While it's not just the goal and purpose of the project to release
>>>> code - it's also vital to the health and growth of our user community.
>>>> Regular, timely releases are important. The 50,000 foot view of things
>>>> is that there is apathy about the 4.1 release. Lots of activity is
>>>> happening around feature development, but not a lot of care (even in
>>>> form of opinions in these threads) given to some of the 4.1 blocker
>>>> issues.
>>>> Performing a release is how we show the world how awesome we are, and
>>>> how awesome our software is. Writing the software, developing cool new
>>>> features and never pushing it out the door is a waste - virtually no
>>>> one but us will see it. The equivalent of getting dressed up for a
>>>> night on the town, but never leaving the house. In short it isn't done
>>>> until there is a release, and seeing large features being developed
>>>> and landing while bugs that block a release take a lot of coaxing to
>>>> get fixed gives a bad impression.
>>>> --David

View raw message