cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mike Tutkowski <mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com>
Subject Re: 4.4 Feature Freeze
Date Mon, 03 Mar 2014 00:47:30 GMT
One serious problem we are having at the time being is the inability to add
XenServer hosts to CloudStack 4.4.

Does anyone know of a solution or workaround for this as it is probably
blocking development for several people?

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-6193


On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Mike Tutkowski <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
> wrote:

> I believe March 14th is Feature Freeze and, as such, when the 4.4 branch
> is cut.
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Sebastien Goasguen <runseb@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>>
>> On Feb 28, 2014, at 9:09 AM, Hugo Trippaers <hugo@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>>
>> > i'm all for being flexible, but i find a lot of the arguments used here
>> debatable.
>> >
>> > "It causes developers to rush their development to meet the deadline."
>> This will happen anyway, every time we've extended the deadline we got new
>> features coming in at the last minute. Actually i'm under the impression
>> that when we move the deadline people will actually try to get more
>> features in instead of working on stabilizing existing features.
>> >
>> > "We can't deliver features on the roadmap." There is validity to this
>> point, but on the other hand we already know the entire release schedule
>> way ahead, this feature freeze date should not come as a surprise. But as i
>> mentioned in an earlier mail, lets have this discussion. Post which
>> features might not make it into the release so we can have a discussion if
>> we should slip the release date to get this feature in. I think we all now
>> that there are commercial parties working with this software to build
>> releases and have customers demanding features, but if we don't discuss
>> that on list it's hard for us to take it into account.
>> >
>> > "Feature freeze wasn't called" True, i wasn't even aware that this was
>> a requirement. We should add this to the procedure here
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Releases so
>> release managers know this is expected of them. It should not impact the
>> dates as the dates are already fixed by the release schedule (every 4
>> months)
>> >
>> >
>> > I'm still -1 on extending the feature freeze. I would rather extend the
>> test/stability phase to we have some more time to fix issues before we get
>> into the RC spinning.
>> >
>> >
>> > This is the list of current features targeted for 4.4 according to our
>> Jira. Which features would be impacted if we don't move the feature freeze?
>> >
>> > ASF JIRA
>> > Project: CloudStack
>> > Type: New Feature
>> > Fix Version: 4.4.0
>> > Resolution: Unresolved
>> > Sorted by: Updated descending
>> > 1-15 of 15 as at: 28/Feb/14 15:07
>> > T     Key     Summary Assignee        Reporter        P       Status
>>  Resolution      Created Updated Due
>> > <newfeature.png>      CLOUDSTACK-6181
>> > Root resize
>> > Unassigned    Nux     <major.png>     <open.png> Open Unresolved
>>  27/Feb/14       27/Feb/14
>> > <newfeature.png>      CLOUDSTACK-6161
>> > distributed routing and network ACL with OVS plug-in
>> > Murali Reddy  Murali Reddy    <major.png>     <open.png> Open
>> Unresolved      24/Feb/14       24/Feb/14
>> > <newfeature.png>      CLOUDSTACK-6092
>> > Storage OverProvisioning as a Per Primary Basis
>> > Saksham Srivastava    Saksham Srivastava      <major.png>
>> <open.png> Open Unresolved      13/Feb/14       20/Feb/14
>> > <newfeature.png>      CLOUDSTACK-6144
>> > HA for guest VMs running Hyper-V
>> > Unassigned    Rajesh Battala  <major.png>     <open.png> Open
>> Unresolved      20/Feb/14       20/Feb/14
>> > <newfeature.png>      CLOUDSTACK-6143
>> > Storage Live-Migration support for Hyper-V
>> > Unassigned    Rajesh Battala  <major.png>     <open.png> Open
>> Unresolved      20/Feb/14       20/Feb/14
>> > <newfeature.png>      CLOUDSTACK-6142
>> > Zone Wide Primary Store in Hyper-V
>> > Unassigned    Rajesh Battala  <major.png>     <open.png> Open
>> Unresolved      20/Feb/14       20/Feb/14
>> > <newfeature.png>      CLOUDSTACK-6104
>> > PVLAN support for CloudStack deployment over Nexus 1000v in VMware
>> environment
>> > Sateesh Chodapuneedi  Sateesh Chodapuneedi    <major.png>
>> <open.png> Open Unresolved      14/Feb/14       15/Feb/14
>> > <newfeature.png>      CLOUDSTACK-6109
>> > Support of iSCSI as primary store in Hyper-V
>> > Rajesh Battala        Rajesh Battala  <major.png>     <open.png>
Open
>> Unresolved      14/Feb/14       14/Feb/14
>> > <newfeature.png>      CLOUDSTACK-6106
>> > Support of VPC in HyperV
>> > Rajesh Battala        Rajesh Battala  <major.png>     <open.png>
Open
>> Unresolved      14/Feb/14       14/Feb/14
>> > <newfeature.png>      CLOUDSTACK-6090
>> > Virtual Router Service Failure Alerting
>> > Harikrishna Patnala   Harikrishna Patnala     <major.png>
>> <open.png> Open Unresolved      13/Feb/14       13/Feb/14
>> > <newfeature.png>      CLOUDSTACK-6052
>> > List VM enhancement to support querying with multiple VM IDs
>> > Koushik Das   Koushik Das     <major.png>     <open.png> Open
>> Unresolved      07/Feb/14       07/Feb/14
>> > <newfeature.png>      CLOUDSTACK-5569
>> > enhance OVS plug-in to support region level VPC and guest networks that
>> span zones
>> > Murali Reddy  Murali Reddy    <major.png>     <open.png> Open
>> Unresolved      19/Dec/13       19/Dec/13
>> > <newfeature.png>      CLOUDSTACK-5568
>> > introduce notion of guest network that spans multiple zones
>> > Murali Reddy  Murali Reddy    <major.png>     <open.png> Open
>> Unresolved      19/Dec/13       19/Dec/13
>> > <newfeature.png>      CLOUDSTACK-5567
>> > enable VPC at region level
>> > Murali Reddy  Murali Reddy    <major.png>     <open.png> Open
>> Unresolved      19/Dec/13       19/Dec/13
>> > <newfeature.png>      CLOUDSTACK-5398
>> > Cloudstack network-element plugin to orchestrate Juniper's switches
>> > Unassigned    Pradeep H Krishnamurthy <major.png>     <open.png>
Open
>> Unresolved      06/Dec/13       06/Dec/13
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Hugo as RM for 4.4 I would like support you in being strict on this.
>>
>> First if a feature is not listed in JIRA right now, then it does not
>> exist and is not planned for 4.4
>> These features should be in topic branches and merges should be called,
>> if one of those gets merged without a MERGE request then we should revert.
>> When a MERGE is called the person calling the merge needs to explain the
>> testing done.
>>
>> Postponing always encourages more postponing, we need to get off the
>> habit of rushing code in and then fixing that code in the multiple RC votes.
>>
>> My take is that we are slipping on RC and re-voting because we are
>> forcing code into the release.
>>
>> I did not check if the 4.4 branch exists already but I would be in favor
>> of locking that branch now with you being the only one to commit to it.
>>
>> -sebastien
>>
>>
>> > Cheers,
>> >
>> > Hugo
>> >
>> > On 28 feb. 2014, at 10:17, Prasanna Santhanam <tsp@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 07:26:10AM +0000, Ram Ganesh wrote:
>> >>> Yes. I can only agree with you on this.  When we come up with dates
>> >>> we have to be cognizant about slips in prior releases (we had 6 RC
>> >>> re-spins and counting....) which would have had impact which is the
>> >>> case now.  We have to be bit flexible with our dates.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> But you do agree that the re-spins uncovered bugs/issues that needed
>> >> to be fixed? Is it perhaps a mismatch in when the artifacts start
>> >> getting tested by the users+devs as opposed to when company-x might be
>> >> satisfied with their testing? More than 90% of the re-spins are
>> >> bugs/issues uncovered by users who needed RC candidates and weren't
>> >> testing artifacts on a daily basis (I could be wrong here). I don't
>> >> think someone with a large test engineering team would wait for the
>> >> RCs to get rolling. May be if we addressed that mismatch in timing we
>> >> could have smaller RC phases. Something like a soft-freeze and a
>> >> hard-freeze.
>> >>
>> >> post soft-freeze : users+devs do a daily test (mostly manually for
>> >> features they care about)
>> >> post hard-freeze : everyone only looks at a daily automated test
>> >> report and if all looks good, we release?
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Prasanna.,
>> >>
>> >> ------------------------
>> >> Powered by BigRock.com
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *Mike Tutkowski*
> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
> e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
> o: 303.746.7302
> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>
> *(tm)*
>



-- 
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the
cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>
*(tm)*

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message