Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cloudstack.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of shadowsor@gmail.com designates
 209.85.128.175 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <DE9E7019760A4B4B8CAF0B3F592F2A6FB99DE4@nlhlmexdb06.ocom.lan>
References: 
 <CALFpzo5bV4Z9M++bHjJbqATHHMB7FF80_AxKaHsb3K-8-o2WHA@mail.gmail.com>
	<5236B1B3.8090704@widodh.nl>
	<DE9E7019760A4B4B8CAF0B3F592F2A6FB99DE4@nlhlmexdb06.ocom.lan>
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 10:02:18 -0600
Message-ID: 
 <CALFpzo44J34Hw1Lr6Cfw=jM=YQ3kkHwqxQP_F=5gzdtisnp7yg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: 4.1 new feature post release?
From: Marcus Sorensen <shadowsor@gmail.com>
To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org>
Cc: Wido den Hollander <wido@widodh.nl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

My impression is that once we freeze for release, we only apply fixes
to bugs. Even if something works better, if the current implementation
works it doesn't change.

I don't have any objections to it being in 4.2 or master, just for
clarification, as it went in so long ago.

On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 1:40 AM, Wei Zhou <w.zhou@leaseweb.com> wrote:
> Marcus and Wido,
> Sorry I just saw this Email.
> I will create a JIRA ticket for them (both code and docs) later. I regarded it as an improvement, not a new feature, this is why I cherry-picked it into 4.1 branch. If you guys object it, I will revert it.
>
> Marcus, could you create tickets for the issues you mentioned? The commit is in 4.2 and master branch as well. We need to fix potential issues.
>
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> Wei ZHOU
> Innovation Engineer Cloud, LeaseWeb B.V.
> w.zhou@leaseweb.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wido den Hollander [mailto:wido@widodh.nl]
> Sent: 16 September 2013 09:22
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Cc: Wei Zhou
> Subject: Re: 4.1 new feature post release?
>
>
>
> On 09/15/2013 07:32 AM, Marcus Sorensen wrote:
>> Hi guys, I was just pulling in updates from the 4.1 branch and noticed
>> commit 706e23623c3227d92ae498529166ca73d2a2bf4e, This looks like a new
>> feature. There's not a bug attached to it. It seems to allow admins to
>> set the CPU mode for KVM guests, e.g. host-passthrough, which makes
>> the VM show the actual CPU model of the host (and breaks live
>> migration in some cases), etc.
>>
>> I see no reason off hand why this should have been cherry-picked into
>> 4.1.  It's been awhile, and I'm not sure whether or not we'll release
>> a 4.1.2, but we may want to review/revert it if we don't find out why
>> it was picked.
>>
>
> Good point. 4.1.2 release or not, there shouldn't be any new features in the 4.1 branch.
>
> Wei, can you comment on this?
>
> Wido
>
>> commit 706e23623c3227d92ae498529166ca73d2a2bf4e
>> Author: JijunLiu <jijunlx@gmail.com>
>> Date:   Sun Jul 14 11:21:39 2013 +0800
>>
>>      Add cpu model for kvm guest.Now all the kvm guest's cpu model is
>> 'QEMU Virtual CPU version xxx'. This will affect the activati
>>
>>      Signed-off-by: Wei Zhou <w.zhou@leaseweb.com>
>>      (cherry picked from commit
>> 2903bb5fd9d59803980102854d11e33ebe56088b)
>>