Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-cloudstack-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-cloudstack-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F3ECCC4D3 for ; Tue, 4 Jun 2013 04:04:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 33168 invoked by uid 500); 4 Jun 2013 04:04:08 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cloudstack-dev-archive@cloudstack.apache.org Received: (qmail 32962 invoked by uid 500); 4 Jun 2013 04:04:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cloudstack.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cloudstack.apache.org Received: (qmail 32934 invoked by uid 99); 4 Jun 2013 04:04:06 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 04 Jun 2013 04:04:06 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of sateesh.chodapuneedi@citrix.com designates 203.166.19.134 as permitted sender) Received: from [203.166.19.134] (HELO SMTP.CITRIX.COM.AU) (203.166.19.134) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 04 Jun 2013 04:03:59 +0000 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,797,1363132800"; d="scan'208";a="2971647" Received: from sinpex01cl03.citrite.net ([10.151.46.34]) by SYDPIPO01.CITRIX.COM.AU with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 04 Jun 2013 04:03:36 +0000 Received: from SINPEX01CL02.citrite.net ([169.254.2.132]) by SINPEX01CL03.citrite.net ([169.254.3.56]) with mapi id 14.02.0342.003; Tue, 4 Jun 2013 12:03:35 +0800 From: Sateesh Chodapuneedi To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" Subject: RE: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze Thread-Topic: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze Thread-Index: AQHOXg+2rVGJ5065sUa3qEKET1BNpZkjf1uAgAC/2oCAACwvgIAAiVnw Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 04:03:35 +0000 Message-ID: <3508DDEF5F3D264CA45D3A2CCE34EF3F09EFD4@SINPEX01CL02.citrite.net> References: <51AD3F39.60809@stratosphere.co.jp> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.144.7.36] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org +1 [Binding] Regards, Sateesh > -----Original Message----- > From: Abhinandan Prateek [mailto:cloudstack@aprateek.com] > Sent: 04 June 2013 09:23 > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze >=20 > +1 [binding]. >=20 > -abhi >=20 > On 04/06/13 6:43 AM, "Hiroaki KAWAI" wrote: >=20 > >+1 because "4.2 will be delayed because 4.1 have been delayed" > >makes sense to me. > > > >Basically, time based release focuses on time only, not quality or > >feature. That's the nature of time based release, IMHO. > >I'm not voting +1 for new feature, and at the same time, I feel unfair > >to vote -1 for blocking new feature. > >I'd like to vote for reasonable time based release. > > > ># I think the version numbering scheme is somewhat problematic. > ># Why not "Cloudstack version 2013Q1" if our release is based on time. > > > >## By the way, I'm -0 about time based release. > > > > > >(2013/06/03 22:46), Chip Childers wrote: > >> Reminder to please VOTE here. This vote will close tomorrow, and > >> your opinion counts. > >> > >> -chip > >> > >> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 11:00:21AM -0400, Chip Childers wrote: > >>> Following our discussion on the proposal to push back the feature > >>>freeze date for 4.2.0 [1], we have not yet achieved a clear > >>>consensus. > >>>Well... > >>> we have already defined the "project rules" for figuring out what to > >>>do. > >>> In out project by-laws [2], we have defined a "release plan" > >>>decision as > >>> follows: > >>> > >>>> 3.4.2. Release Plan > >>>> > >>>> Defines the timetable and work items for a release. The plan also > >>>> nominates a Release Manager. > >>>> > >>>> A lazy majority of active committers is required for approval. > >>>> > >>>> Any active committer or PMC member may call a vote. The vote must > >>>>occur on a project development mailing list. > >>> > >>> And our lazy majority is defined as: > >>> > >>>> 3.2.2. Lazy Majority - A lazy majority vote requires 3 binding +1 > >>>> votes and more binding +1 votes than binding -1 votes. > >>> > >>> Our current plan is the starting point, so this VOTE is a vote to > >>>change the current plan. We require a 72 hour window for this vote, > >>>so IMO we are in an odd position where the feature freeze date is at > >>>least extended until Tuesday of next week. > >>> > >>> Our current plan of record for 4.2.0 is at [3]. > >>> > >>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/vi3nsd2yo763kzua > >>> [2] http://s.apache.org/csbylaws > >>> [3] > >>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Cloudstack+4.2 > >>>+Re > >>>lease > >>> > >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> > >>> I'd like to call a VOTE on the following: > >>> > >>> Proposal: Extend the feature freeze date for our 4.2.0 feature > >>> release from today (2013-05-31) to 2013-06-28. All other dates > >>> following the feature freeze date in the plan would be pushed out 4 w= eeks as well. > >>> > >>> Please respond with one of the following: > >>> > >>> +1 : change the plan as listed above > >>> +/-0 : no strong opinion, but leaning + or - > >>> -1 : do not change the plan > >>> > >>> This vote will remain open until Tuesday morning US eastern time. > >>> > >>> -chip > > >=20