cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Edison Su <Edison...@citrix.com>
Subject RE: [VOTE] Adapting git workflow for release branches
Date Wed, 20 Aug 2014 21:59:15 GMT


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sebastien Goasguen [mailto:runseb@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2014 1:47 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Adapting git workflow for release branches
> 
> 
> On Aug 20, 2014, at 4:33 PM, Edison Su <Edison.su@citrix.com> wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Rohit Yadav [mailto:rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com]
> >> Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2014 1:17 PM
> >> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Adapting git workflow for release branches
> >>
> >>
> >> On 20-Aug-2014, at 9:55 pm, Edison Su <Edison.su@citrix.com> wrote:
> >>> Maybe I need to reiterate why I reject the proposal for now, as I am
> >>> the
> >> only person vote -1(binding).
> >>> I think we all understand the pain as a release manager, even right
> >>> after 4.2 release, I asked community to think about how We gonna fix
> >>> the
> >> release procedure(http://markmail.org/message/3bptkm2xyrai6i7m), no
> >> much response at that time.
> >>> But the situation is much better now, as more and more people are
> >>> trying
> >> to solve the problem, instead of staying on the status quo.
> >>> To me, the highest priority issue we need to solve is the CI, even a
> >>> simple
> >> CI against simulator, will catch a lot of regressions in management
> >> server code.
> >>> The second priority, is code review.
> >>> The git flow co-relates to how we gonna solve above two issues. I
> >>> think that's the different opinions we have today, and I already
> >>> made the point that If we choose different ways to solve the above
> >>> two issues, we may choose different git flow:
> >>> http://markmail.org/message/hyk54z7imn5gyqkn
> >>> So can't we just put our efforts to solve the big problems at first,
> >>> instead of
> >> debating on the small things forever?
> >>
> >> I surrender (and this proposal), but I would still like to see
> >> something actionable on the "big" problems from your side like why
> >> don't you start a proposal/discussion around it? Let's solve the biggies first.
> >
> > There are several proposals from Citrix:
> > http://markmail.org/thread/c4pded5i3r22keqw
> > http://markmail.org/thread/xoyjw2sduenlytwm
> 
> Edison, Citrix can't make proposals. Individuals do..
Sorry, what I am trying to say is "from people, who happen to be employee from Citrix".

> I know Citrix has an internal BVT/CI whatever you want to call it system, but
> until it is live for the whole community I don't think there is any point of
> discussing it.
> 
> There is hardware being donated (which people on this list may not be aware
> off), but it is not available yet, nor do we know how this hardware will be
> managed.
> So right now the only apache infra we have to do CI is the current jenkins
> setup and things like TravisCI which I have mentioned before.
> 
> In any case, the threads you mention did not reach consensus or led to a
> vote thread. The way forward is to keep working on those threads or start a
> VOTE thread.
> 
> I am just wondering what we will VOTE on in terms of CI, since there is no
> infra to do it yet and nobody seems to be owning this (or maybe I missed
> some threads).

Ok, I got it. So right now, we don't have problem about need to have CI or not,
It's about how will gonna do it, right?
The options we have today:
1.TravisCi, 
2. the CI donated from Citrix(I heard of that the donated hardware is delayed, I mistakenly
thought the hardware is already donated), 
3. any other hardware( I am working on a machine created on DigitalOcean, $80/month, 8G memory,
4 core cpus, SSD, I want to donate it as CI machine personally, if there is no other good
solution)
Any other options?

> 
> -sebastien
> 
> > Citrix also donates real hardware for CI.
> > We don't lack of proposals to solve these issues, it's community has
> > different opinions On how to solve these issues, or don't solve these issues
> at all.
> > Going forward, we need to have consensus on we have to solve these
> > issues before we start another release:
> > http://markmail.org/thread/ofalvk4uhejtffpg
> >
> >>
> >> Edison the things I was trying to bring IMO won't conflict with any
> >> future CI/code review process that we may adopt, they focus on how we
> >> can improve community participation and do (multiple) releases &
> >> commit maintenance across branches.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Rohit Yadav
> >> Software Architect, ShapeBlue
> >> M. +41 779015219 | rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com
> >> Blog: bhaisaab.org | Twitter: @_bhaisaab
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related
> >> services
> >>
> >> IaaS Cloud Design & Build<http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-
> >> build//>
> >> CSForge - rapid IaaS deployment
> >> framework<http://shapeblue.com/csforge/>
> >> CloudStack Consulting<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/>
> >> CloudStack Infrastructure Support<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-
> >> infrastructure-support/>
> >> CloudStack Bootcamp Training
> Courses<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-
> >> training/>
> >>
> >> This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are
> >> intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is
> >> addressed. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the
> >> author and do not necessarily represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or
> >> related companies. If you are not the intended recipient of this
> >> email, you must neither take any action based upon its contents, nor
> >> copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you believe
> >> you have received this email in error. Shape Blue Ltd is a company
> >> incorporated in England & Wales. ShapeBlue Services India LLP is a
> >> company incorporated in India and is operated under license from
> >> Shape Blue Ltd. Shape Blue Brasil Consultoria Ltda is a company
> >> incorporated in Brasil and is operated under license from Shape Blue
> >> Ltd. ShapeBlue SA Pty Ltd is a company registered by The Republic of
> South Africa and is traded under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is a
> registered trademark.


Mime
View raw message