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: 4.9+ release
Date Wed, 15 Jun 2016 06:59:41 GMT
maybe I should have answered here instead of the other thread :S

I am all with John on this. I can not judge the dates but the overall ideas
are spot on.

I now see the API weren't mentioned in this thread I think they should.

On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 1:53 AM, ilya <ilya.mailing.lists@gmail.com> wrote:

> I agree and support John's comments below.
>
> Regards
> ilya
>
> On 6/14/16 2:44 PM, John Burwell wrote:
> > All,
> >
> > Completely agree with Daan.  Per semantic versioning, a major revision
> increase must introduce a backwards incompatible change in the public API,
> removal of one of more supported devices, reduction in the list of
> supported distributions.  I agree that when we require Java8+, drop Ubuntu
> 12.04 support, drop support for an old hypervisor version, etc,  we will
> need to increment the major revision to reflect the fact that the release
> is not backwards compatible.
> >
> > For 4.10 and LTS 4.9.0_1, I see it as critical that we support running
> on either Java7 or Java8.  In particular, producing an LTS release that
> only supports a JVM that has been unsupported for nearly 18 months would
> make it DOA in many shops.
> >
> > It seems like it would make sense to have a 5.0.0 release that removed
> support for a number of legacy components (e.g. Xen 6.0 possibly 6.2,
> Java7, CentOS 5, etc), as well as, internal improvements (e.g. simplified
> configuration).  The focus of this release would be to reduce the footprint
> of codebase, as well as, make a set of backwards incompatible changes that
> further decouples plugins from core.  We would then plan for a 6.0.0 in
> 4Q2017 to introduce further architectural changes and API revisions.  The
> advantage to this approach is that it breaks up the large refactorings and
> architectural design changes — allowing us to gain velocity by removing
> legacy components, reducing the risk of these changes, and providing user
> benefit earlier.  Based on the release plan I previously proposed we have
> the following releases remaining in 2016 and in early 2017:
> >
> > * 4.10 releasing on or about 28 August 2016
> > * 4.11 releasing on or about 23 October 2016
> > * 4.12 releasing on or about 18 December 2016
> > * 4.13 release on or about 5 February 2017
> >
> > 4.12 seems to be the sweet spot in the schedule to cut the 5.0.0 release
> described above.  It would give us sometime to plan and gain consensus
> around the changes in both the user and dev communities.  It would also
> allow the second LTS release to be based on 5.0.0 — allowing both release
> cycles to take advantage of the reduced support requirements and Java8
> language features. Based on this proposal, the releases above would change
> to the following:
> >
> > * 4.10 releasing on or about 28 August 2016
> > * 4.11 releasing on or about 23 October 2016
> > * 5.0.0 releasing on or about 18 December 2016
> > * 5.1.0 release on or about 5 February 2017
> >
> > I am in the process of moving my proposal into the wiki.  If this
> approach is acceptable, I will reflect it there, and open a thread to
> discuss 5.0.0.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -John
> >
> >
> >>
> > john.burwell@shapeblue.com
> > www.shapeblue.com
> > 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK
> > @shapeblue
> >
> >
> > On Jun 14, 2016, at 2:02 PM, Paul Angus <paul.angus@shapeblue.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> +1 Daan.
> >>
> >> My recollection was that major version number changes were only to be
> triggered by breaks in backward compatibility (API).
> >>
> >>
> >> Kind regards,
> >>
> >> Paul Angus
> >>
> >> paul.angus@shapeblue.com
> >> www.shapeblue.com
> >> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK
> >> @shapeblue
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogland@gmail.com]
> >> Sent: 14 June 2016 14:47
> >> To: dev <dev@cloudstack.apache.org>
> >> Cc: Rajani Karuturi <rajani@apache.org>
> >> Subject: Re: 4.9+ release
> >>
> >> You know that would require more then one byte for our minor version,
> Will.
> >> I would be very pleased to go to 5.0 before that time.
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 3:43 PM, Will Stevens <wstevens@cloudops.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Daan is just trying to get us to version 4.256.  :P
> >>>
> >>> *Will STEVENS*
> >>> Lead Developer
> >>>
> >>> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
> >>> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 w cloudops.com *|* tw
> >>> @CloudOps_
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 9:41 AM, Daan Hoogland
> >>> <daan.hoogland@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> -1 to what Wido said. None of those points warant a major release
> >>>> number upgrade. these should all be in 4.10, -.11, -12 etc.
> >>>>
> >>>> major incompatibilities like API refactor, dropping backend support
> >>>> for this or that hyporvisor or DB refactor are the things that
> >>>> warrant 5.0, IMNSHO
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 1:13 PM, Will Stevens
> >>>> <williamstevens@gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> +1. :)
> >>>>> On Jun 14, 2016 5:07 AM, "Wido den Hollander" <wido@widodh.nl>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Op 14 juni 2016 om 10:55 schreef Rajani Karuturi <
> >>> rajani@apache.org
> >>>>> :
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 4.10 or 5.0?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I would say 4.10
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> We are in the 4.* release cycle from a long time.
> >>>>>>> Just wanted to check if anyone is planning on major changes
> >>>>>>> which
> >>>>>> warrants
> >>>>>>> 5.0
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 5.0 should imho be:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> - Java 8
> >>>>>> - Ubuntu 16.04 / systemd support
> >>>>>> - Drop support for older libvirt versions (KVM)
> >>>>>> - Some killer feature(s)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Wido
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> ~Rajani
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Daan
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Daan
> >
>



-- 
Daan

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