cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Hugo Trippaers <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] LTS Releases
Date Tue, 25 Nov 2014 16:35:51 GMT
Top posting here as my remarks are mainly on the original topic.

I’m not in favor of supporting LTS releases as a community. The reasoning here is that there
is a huge chance that we will fragment the community in people that just want to work on the
latest and greatest and some other folks who are trying to keep older releases from being
updated with newer fixes. It requires a lot of dedicated commitment to keep an LTS release
going. Particularly if you yourself are already working with a newer release in your environment.
So from a personal standpoint i can almost guarantee that i will probably not spend the time
and effort of back porting any fixes i do to older versions of CloudStack.

That doesn’t mean that it can’t happen. If people are willing to take charge of an LTS
branch and are willing to do the work to back port fixes where appropriate i would happily
support them and even try to test the releases so we can have an official release. 

New developers might also be scared by the fact that a fix they make has to be supported on
multiple branches and might decide not to commit such a fix because of the work involved.
With the rate of change in the code at the moment this is also very hard for seasoned developers,
so much little, but important stuff changes all the time that back porting is very difficult.
It is an open source project and generally people will want to focus on the latest and greatest
and just get their features in. I’m already regularly having some trouble back porting between
master and 4.5. Consider back porting to master, 4.5 and 4.3 as well and having to test each

Basically my point is, everyone who wants to LTS support a certain branch is free to do so.
Whether or not other contributors or committers will want to do that is their choice. As a
community we should not make any promises about LTS support for a certain branch. 



> On 25 nov. 2014, at 16:16, Rohit Yadav <> wrote:
> Hey Daan,
>> On 25-Nov-2014, at 7:26 pm, Daan Hoogland <> wrote:
>> That is worrying, Rohit. As the rest of your mail is already a vote of
>> distrust, this part says we should not release 4.4.2 as it contains
>> regressions.
> Looks like you skimmed my email and missed the following from my previous email:
> “Note: This is not to say that 4.4.x is not stable, we’re simply saying we recommend
4.3.x because we have a confidence of its stability and we encourage serious CloudStack users
to use it.”
> 4.4.x is probably the greatest ACS feature release ever but I would still recommend conservative
users (who consult me) to stick to 4.3.x for production since we know it just works with least
amount of pain. The other issue is I know a lot of people who are on ACS 4.3.x still (including
ShapeBlue’s customers) want to have bugfix releases and they may not want to migrate to
4.4.x right now since 4.5.x is about 2–3 months away.
> ACS when consumed by enterprise companies has a typical lifecycle that lasts at least
6 months, that means someone needs to support it, therefore the idea of official LTS releases.
>> This is a very bad signal to users and the rest of the
>> community. What you are saying is (you in transitive form), 'we won't
>> port fixes to 4.4 but only to 4.3 so upgrade to newer 4.3 versions and
>> not to a 4.4 version. You have the right to do so but I don't like it.
> In any form I did not say anything about not helping out or not porting things. People
who know me, know that I love to help everyone and I’m quite prompt at reply and resolving
things. I’ve taken the task to maintain 4.3 and you’re very welcome to go thorough JIRA
etc. to backport things that you want for 4.4 since you’re alone the gatekeeper of this
> I’m going through these bugs that have a different fix version (not 4.3.0 or 4.3.1):
> Wido suggested that backporting is time consuming so as a challenge I’ve went through
50 issues today, I was able to understand/backport about 25 of them that qualified for 4.3
branch (many of them were trivial,;a=commit;h=f72eb945540e607ff25917922b4084187246f31a),
about 10 of them were hard to backport so I’ve asked authors to help out. I think with this
speed I alone should be able to go through like 300 issues reported on JIRA in about 10-15
days time and after than about 10-20 days of testing and getting the bugfix release out. Though
if we all help out we can get more mileage.
> It sucks for me personally that I’ve been emailing you privately about cherry-pick
and asking you to pick them on 4.4 (also leaving messages on JIRA). I’ll continue to do
that :) and meanwhile, you are very welcome to go see the things I picked on 4.3 and pick
those applicable on 4.4.
> Yours friendly and as always,
> Rohit Yadav
> Software Architect, ShapeBlue
> M. +91 88 262 30892 |
> Blog: | Twitter: @_bhaisaab
> Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services
> IaaS Cloud Design & Build<>
> CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework<>
> CloudStack Consulting<>
> CloudStack Software Engineering<>
> CloudStack Infrastructure Support<>
> CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courses<>
> 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.

View raw message