cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nux! <...@li.nux.ro>
Subject Re: Next ACS release?
Date Wed, 22 Apr 2015 18:22:26 GMT
+1 what Paul said.

--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!

Nux!
www.nux.ro

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paul Angus" <paul.angus@shapeblue.com>
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Sent: Wednesday, 22 April, 2015 19:13:04
> Subject: RE: Next ACS release?

> I fully support the idea of a stable master with an automated CD process to
> protect against regressions.
> 
> ....However, we obviously don't currently have fantastic integration testing
> otherwise we wouldn't have relied on 'people' to pick up the release blockers
> recently.  A 2 week release cycle IMHO is way too frequent to expect 'people'
> to be carrying out integration testing.
> 
> Maybe 1 month is a workable compromise until the integration testing is of a
> coverage and standard that can give real confidence.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm also going to compile a list of people who vote "+1 - it works on my laptop"
> and devise a Guinness related punishment for any of them that show up at the
> CloudStack day in Dublin.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Paul Angus
> Cloud Architect
> S: +44 20 3603 0540 | M: +447711418784 | T: CloudyAngus
> paul.angus@shapeblue.com
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Remi Bergsma [mailto:remi@remi.nl]
> Sent: 22 April 2015 10:25
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Next ACS release?
> 
> I'd be happy to help here as well. Last week in Austin, we also discussed this
> topic a couple of times. I do agree shorter release cycles are better.
> 
> In my opinion, the first thing to improve is the minor releases in both the
> 4.4 and 4.5 branches. If we speed those up to let's say once every 2-weeks we
> will be able to do the next minor release with less effort and users can choose
> to either wait to start using 4.5 or start now and upgrade when the next minor
> release is available. This would have helped in getting 4.5 out on time and
> quickly fixing issues after the initial release. Also, it will save time which
> we can invest in getting the next release out on time, etc.
> 
> The common thing here is we need more automated testing, preferably functional
> testing in addition to unit testing. There might also be other steps that we do
> manually now that can be automated. I'll try to understand the current process
> first and then come up with a proposal to improve which we can discuss.
> 
> Regards,
> Remi
> 
> 2015-04-22 10:56 GMT+02:00 Erik Weber <terbolous@gmail.com>:
> 
>> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Daan Hoogland
>> <daan.hoogland@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 10:29 AM, Erik Weber <terbolous@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 9:49 AM, Stephen Turner <
>> > Stephen.Turner@citrix.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> I have to admit I'm a bit sceptical because when we did have a
>> > four-month
>> > >> release cycle, we never seemed to manage to meet it. Personally I
>> think
>> > >> six-monthly might be easier.
>> > >>
>> > >> Having said that, part of the problem was the long close-down
>> > >> period
>> > where
>> > >> we kept finding critical bugs, so more automated testing might
>> > >> help to shorten the cycle.
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > > - Shorter cycle means that it's less of a problem to miss a
>> > > deadline, meaning you can spend more time on QA.
>> > > - Longer cycle means that it could be critical to meet the
>> > > deadline, meaning you might end up doing less QA while stressing
>> > > to get your
>> > feature
>> > > in.
>> > >
>> > > My $.002
>> >
>> >
>> Yes, Eric and the amount of qa needed is less as well. Bare with me
>> > for a little rant here.
>> >
>> > When less new features are introduced less new interdependencies are
>> > introduced. I could try and expand on this but people make phd on
>> > the subject so that would be presumptuous of me.
>> >
>> > un-educated guess is (m + n)! - m!
>> > where m is old features and n is new features
>> >
>> > example:
>> > 1 old feature + 1 new feature mean 1 check to see if they (still)
>> > work
>> > 1 old feature + 2 new features means 3 checks to see if they all
>> > work
>> > 2 + 2 = 6 of which only 1 is old and should be fine
>> > 2 + 3 = 10, see the n! progressing ;)
>> >
>> >
>> > this is an over simplification as the complexity of features comes
>> > in play as well. I make them out for being function points here.
>> > those are fables of course.
>> >
>> > thanks for baring that.
>> >
>> >
>> I'm all with you on this Daan.
>> Just for the record, my notion of QA was meant at the feature
>> developer, ie. that they could use more time on test coverage etc.
>> without having to worry that much about feature freeze dates.
>>
>> --
>> Erik
>>
> 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 Software
> Engineering<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/>
> 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