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 912F3103EC for ; Mon, 5 Aug 2013 15:10:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 87538 invoked by uid 500); 5 Aug 2013 15:10:29 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cloudstack-dev-archive@cloudstack.apache.org Received: (qmail 87029 invoked by uid 500); 5 Aug 2013 15:10:28 -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 87021 invoked by uid 99); 5 Aug 2013 15:10:25 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 05 Aug 2013 15:10:25 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of daan.hoogland@gmail.com designates 209.85.219.47 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.219.47] (HELO mail-oa0-f47.google.com) (209.85.219.47) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 05 Aug 2013 15:10:20 +0000 Received: by mail-oa0-f47.google.com with SMTP id g12so6537474oah.34 for ; Mon, 05 Aug 2013 08:09:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=wP04wf39Hf5dicY94vpjudiEWYk7L3ncQ69n6QIy79Q=; b=p0jiW3Ld3W+SeqWnNnto3etfcxws3vXY4KHpWpgQfbP1fZpxtFB9ZU+kTfjqZST1BX 5MyLYD/1lgFrfTo+XdN8qPPAp3SH9KDzyldlKMABhOxpr3YZPScLdwvgkt6wZmqREqEf P698s121N+YO4FqS56XNToj1ytyeukllcBUfop8/DZJKtmubrvgDEdIcJ4/MMnnvk6bm NZ0QyitGiS/8SshaeCHTAK/bWwhaxZc2LZpzSIAeV1ooV4h+joNytDI8OhwoYEkROBRD ej1H1sxa7y6cAhwhSV90vbxhGxHeJ9BAvrYC+hcejB8iowSbPz7uwUJdbmi3y9mHb0Qt 6pyw== X-Received: by 10.50.120.74 with SMTP id la10mr445558igb.19.1375715399083; Mon, 05 Aug 2013 08:09:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.64.252.226 with HTTP; Mon, 5 Aug 2013 08:09:38 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20130514144130.GB24552@USLT-205755.sungardas.corp> <20130731153019.GR49234@USLT-205755.sungardas.corp> From: Daan Hoogland Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 17:09:38 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Should we be releasing -beta releases? To: dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org For this the jenkins builds might be suitable. I think if those are running on all active release branches. On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Nux! wrote: > On 31.07.2013 16:30, Chip Childers wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 12:04:50AM +0100, Nux! wrote: >>> >>> On 14.05.2013 15:41, Chip Childers wrote: >>>> >>>> As a way to get more user feedback on our major feature releases, what >>>> does everyone think about releasing one or two -beta releases for each >>>> major feature release? >>> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> What has been decided? Will we see any 4.2 betas? >>> >>> Lucian >>> >>> -- >>> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! >>> >>> Nux! >>> www.nux.ro >>> >> >> I think that we realized that the upgrade support problems are >> significant enough to make this difficult right now. Consider it an >> aspiration for the future. > > > To be honest even "unsupported" betas might be good. I'd be willing to test > betas even without upgradability to "stable", just to see what to expect, > what's new, what's good, what's bad etc. > I'm sure there are many like me. > Sure, I can download and build it myself, but it would've been much more > convenient to have some RPMs on cloudstack.apt-get.eu; plus, not everyone is > comfortable building RPMs or from source etc. > > > Lucian > > -- > Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! > > Nux! > www.nux.ro