cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [ASF4.2.1] Release Notes
Date Fri, 15 Nov 2013 09:20:17 GMT
So the -1 is because of the lack of rn and upgrade path docs, right, I
think I proposed earlier this thread to release after the doc
hackathon privided that. I wasn't really explicit about it I think as
no one commented on this strategy. Would that be acceptable to you all
(especially David and Sebastien)?

I agree btw that docs must be available, but I don't think these have
to be as stable as the release. We should allow for improving the docs
on a release if needed. The net result of what I am proposing is that
there will be a release and a docs rc. This is what the splitting of
of the docs was about in my view,. Makes sense?

If not, we should not try to make CCC Europe with 4.2.1. I think this
is what the hurry is about

Daan

On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Sebastien Goasguen <runseb@gmail.com> wrote:
> I might be behind on the discussions here, but I will veto an RC that does not have list
of bugs fixed and proper upgrade path documented (minimum of a fix from 4.2.0 upgrade docs).
Separate repo of the docs or not.
>
> Right now I see that the bugs fix list points to a jira filter. This is not consistent
with the way it was done in prior releases (explicit listing) and in 4.2 (which pointed to
the RN). We need consistency. What happens if someone changes this jira filter ?
>
> I also would like to see the results of the test matrix for 4.2.1 running within jenkins.buildacloud.org.
 This http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/view/cloudstack-qa/ runs against master and has been
failing for a while.
>
> PS: I did test it and did the usual smoke test
>
> so -1 (binding) at this time
>
> -sebastien
>
>
> On Nov 14, 2013, at 4:20 PM, Chip Childers <chipchilders@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Except that the separation only helps if it allows RC testing + voting
>> during doc finalization.  If we announce before docs, it hurts us.
>> I'm against another announcement that goes out with the docs in poor
>> shape.
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 3:44 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi
>> <animesh.chaturvedi@citrix.com> wrote:
>>> Unless there are objection to the RC, I would prefer to have it released and
make the announcement sooner and showcase in collab conference. As Chip mentions docs were
broken out separately anyway.
>>>
>>> Animesh
>>>
>>>
>>> On 14/11/13 8:12 pm, "Sebastien Goasguen" <runseb@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Anyway we can wait next week to release.
>>>>
>>>> quite a few of us will be together in Amsterdam, we can dedicate a
>>>> hackathon session to 4.2.1 , make sure RN are good, upgrade path
>>>> etcŠthen testŠ.
>>>>
>>>> I'd recommend keeping the vote open until then.
>>>>
>>>> -sebastien
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Nov 14, 2013, at 5:57 AM, Radhika Puthiyetath
>>>> <radhika.puthiyetath@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> The master has the most up-to-date RN for 4.2.1.
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Abhinandan Prateek
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2013 2:22 PM
>>>>> To: CloudStack Dev
>>>>> Cc: Radhika Puthiyetath
>>>>> Subject: Re: [ASF4.2.1] Release Notes
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems the upgrade section of release notes will require a review,
>>>>> probably followed by a revamp (?).
>>>>> Can we have some volunteers who are familiar with various upgrade
>>>>> paths comment on it ?
>>>>> Me and Radhika will try to consolidate those comments, snippets and
>>>>> fix the RN for 4.2.1.
>>>>>
>>>>> -abhi
>>>>>
>>>>> RN for 4.2.1 =
>>>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack-docs.git;a=tree;f
>>>>> =re
>>>>> lease-notes;h=8128d62c39236331492f3642914bf97b43ed2670;hb=refs/heads/4
>>>>> .2
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>

Mime
View raw message