cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Edison Su <Edison...@citrix.com>
Subject RE: Swift in 4.2 is broken, anybody wants it to be supported in 4.2?
Date Tue, 09 Jul 2013 17:56:24 GMT


> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Burwell [mailto:jburwell@basho.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2013 7:53 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Cc: 'Chip Childers'
> Subject: Re: Swift in 4.2 is broken, anybody wants it to be supported in 4.2?
> 
> Edison,
> 
> As I read through this thread, we seem to be conflating the following topics:
> 
> 	1. Feature regression testing per release cycle
> 	2. Identifying and back porting defect fixes to previous releases
> 	3. Feature removal process
> 
> To my mind, these topics are completely unrelated.  We have regression test
> and defect triage processes to address items 1 and 2.  If you feel that they
> can be improved, then we should discuss those improvements in a separate
> thread.  No community or system will be perfect.  I believe the best we can
> do is seek to do it better today than yesterday.  To that end, observing that
> we did something poorly in the past does not justify continuing to do it
> poorly or removing a feature on which users are relying.
> 
> 
> I am concerned about item 3 -- the merge of a feature removal without
> community consensus.  If you *think* a feature is broken in a previous

This feature is not been tested since about one and half year ago, nobody knows the status
of swift integration.
If we can't claim to support Swift in 4.0, 4.1, then why you think I am removing a feature?

> release, test it and lodge defects or request help to regression test it.  We
> have a maintenance release cycle through which we can address these types
> of defects.  As I stated previously, existing feature defects are not a
> justification to remove that feature.
> 
> Thanks,
> -John
> 
> On Jul 8, 2013, at 7:35 PM, Edison Su <Edison.su@citrix.com> wrote:
> 
> > And I want to point out, that, it's easy to say this feature and that feature
> are supported in certain release, but without fully tested for each release,
> only God will know the status.
> > For example, there is a bug in 4.2:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-2583, it says can't
> backup snapshot from primary storage into S3 if the hypervisor is xenserver.
> > It's fired for 4.2, but actually, 4.1 will have the same issue.
> > Will we claim, to support S3 in 4.1, while the major functionality of S3 is
> broken?
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: John Burwell [mailto:jburwell@basho.com]
> >> Sent: Monday, July 08, 2013 1:42 PM
> >> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> >> Cc: 'Chip Childers'
> >> Subject: Re: Swift in 4.2 is broken, anybody wants it to be supported in 4.2?
> >>
> >> All,
> >>
> >> I apologize for losing track of this issue.  We discussed the lack of
> >> Swift support briefly in late May/early June as part of the first
> >> round review, but I completely lost track of it in the sea of items being
> addressed.
> >>
> >> This gap represents a feature deprecation without any community
> discussion.
> >> A lack of code changes or test requests for a feature does not
> >> translate to no usage.  It also does not provide license for a
> >> feature to be dropped without community discussion and consensus.
> >>
> >> In summary, post merge is not the time to be asking this question.  I
> >> am concerned about the precedent this action will set in future release
> cycles.
> >> Furthermore, re-implementation of a feature should be complete.  To
> >> me, it is not acceptable to say, "I re-implemented the functionality
> >> with which I was familiar.  Hey, community, if you like those other
> >> parts, you will need to fill in the gaps."  To my mind, a feature
> >> re-implementation should not be acceptable until it implements all of the
> capabilities it is replacing.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> -John
> >>
> >> On Jul 8, 2013, at 1:30 PM, Sudha Ponnaganti
> >> <sudha.ponnaganti@citrix.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Swift was tested for older version of Citrix release. There were  no
> >>> code
> >> changes or certification requests, so that area was deprioritized.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks
> >>> /Sudha
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Edison Su [mailto:Edison.su@citrix.com]
> >>> Sent: Monday, July 08, 2013 10:15 AM
> >>> To: 'Chip Childers'; <dev@cloudstack.apache.org>
> >>> Subject: RE: Swift in 4.2 is broken, anybody wants it to be supported in
> 4.2?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.childers@sungard.com]
> >>>> Sent: Monday, July 08, 2013 6:46 AM
> >>>> To: <dev@cloudstack.apache.org>; Edison Su
> >>>> Subject: Re: Swift in 4.2 is broken, anybody wants it to be supported
in
> 4.2?
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 9:22 AM, David Nalley <david@gnsa.us> wrote:
> >>>>> On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 5:29 PM, Edison Su <Edison.su@citrix.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>>> Due to object store refactor, Swift is broken. The reason, is
> >>>>>> that, we only
> >>>> have S3 test environment in our lab, so only S3 is tested for now.
> >>>>>> Before adding the feature back, I'd better ask from, the
> >>>>>> community, do
> >>>> we want to support Swift? If so, which version of Swift? This will
> >>>> take some efforts to support Swift, are there any volunteers can
> >>>> help the
> >> integration?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Whats the bug ID for this?
> >>>>> Unplanned/Unannounced deprecation of a feature is a blocker IMO.
> >>>>> It engenders a bad relationship with our users, and strands them
> >>>>> on previous versions with no good migration/upgrade path.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --David
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Edison, How broken is it?  Is it shorter to fix or revert the
> >>>> object store changes?
> >>> It's not working at all. Not sure, revert object store will change
> >>> it or not, as
> >> this feature is not tested by QA for a long time.
> >>>
> >


Mime
View raw message