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: [PROPOSAL] stable master and 4.6 release
Date Wed, 16 Sep 2015 08:11:41 GMT
I think you are being an optimist saying 2-4 weeks but I second the
attempt. +1

On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 10:07 AM, Rohit Yadav <rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com>
wrote:

> Based on some discussion from slack, I think there is no harm in
> experimenting this for let’s say 2-4 weeks; at worst we would have blocked
> people from merging new features etc.
>
> Remi/Rajani - do you think we can pull this off (fix blockers and do a
> 4.6.0 release) in next 2-4 weeks?
>
> On 16-Sep-2015, at 1:28 pm, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogland@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 9:38 AM, Rohit Yadav <rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com>
> wrote:
>
> 1. Only BLOCKER fixes to master. If there's something else that needs to
> get in, it can be discussed with the RMs on a case-by-case basis.
>
>
> -1 -ish
> What you’re effectively saying is to freeze/block master from new changes
> until 4.6.0 releases which could take anywhere from one week to many weeks.
> In reality that may be undesirable and can contribute to loss of developer
> productivity time.
>
> ​agree and​
>
>
>
> Few suggestions, though I’m not sure that best way to go forward: why not
> create a 4.6 branch and merge it back when 4.6.0 releases? Alternatively,
> create a development branch on which development can continue and we merge
> it back to master when that branch is stable enough and 4.6.0 has released?
>
> ​I don't feel we should create a developer branch, branching 4.6.0 now and
> fixing blockers there to merge them back to master as they are fixed seems
> the way to go to me.
> ​
>
>
>
> 2. Atleast one of the reviewers of a PR should do the actual tests. We do
> not have good CI in place and travis just does simulator tests.
>
>
> +1 some of us talking in the background to setup an automated QA system to
> use existing marvin tests to do long running integration tests but other
> than Travis or Jenkins (b.a.o) we don’t have anything.
>
> ​I hate this but still +1​ (CI is/should be there so we don't need this)
>
>
>
> --
> Daan
>
>
> Regards,
> Rohit Yadav
> Software Architect, ShapeBlue
>
>
>
>
> M. +91 88 262 30892 | 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 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.
>



-- 
Daan

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