Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cloudstack.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
From: Alex Hitchins <alex@alexhitchins.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 19:03:48 +0100
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] - Releases, Project Management & Funding Thereof
Message-Id: <7CCD7C07-C0CC-4D6F-B712-B4EBC9F58A93@alexhitchins.com>
References: <03ff01d2f18e$6b24a760$416df620$@alexhitchins.com> <d7bc9f94-2dda-3d2a-7eb3-094ca87bbd63@artifact-software.com> <CAC2panpXoWc+B2WF07AwHtSa+YtEL6cHMdEbbZdxNiZXPhDv=Q@mail.gmail.com> <045401d2f1a7$7ac1f650$7045e2f0$@alexhitchins.com> <CAC2panr85ia7ywRNGSg9VML8JE9A7Uk=jYc7ULciTbkPWnPnpw@mail.gmail.com> <049101d2f1a9$db0a7b70$911f7250$@alexhitchins.com> <DB5PR07MB13344B40EEAB6DEEDF594AF88CD30@DB5PR07MB1334.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <0af6ebb1-8ca7-8166-e08c-12c26900ea6e@artifact-software.com> <CAC2panpy1vHUNf3O+zM6uchsv9ZQ=OUGPNU-uh4a9Bv+2kwT6A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAC2panpy1vHUNf3O+zM6uchsv9ZQ=OUGPNU-uh4a9Bv+2kwT6A@mail.gmail.com>
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
archived-at: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 18:03:57 -0000

This makes me think of the OpenSSL (I think) that have some 'foundation' whe=
re there is a paid engineer and donated servers, switches etc to maintain bu=
ilds and tests.

In my opinion, we need the same.

Who out there in a position to comment thinks they would be able to commit s=
ome budget towards some sort of dedicated role of which everyone benefits. Y=
ou can contact me personally if you want to remain anonymous. Not asking for=
 figures at this stage, just general intent.

Alex

> On 30 Jun 2017, at 18:14, Will Stevens <williamstevens@gmail.com> wrote:
>=20
> Have not looked at Release Tsar, but worth checking out.
>=20
> In general, the biggest problem we have with releasing on a schedule is th=
e
> lack of a CI setup which covers the entire software. Or at least a
> 'supported' set of features. This means that the release is always bound t=
o
> a bunch of volunteers getting around to testing their use case. Solidfire
> and Nuage are pretty good about getting some CI run on some pieces.
> Trillian is great for covering a portion of the tests, but it currently
> does not cover the whole software use case. We also need more trillian
> deployments in the wild to support the CI initiative.
>=20
> We do need to be stricter about nothing going in after an RC is cut but
> blockers. The limited CI coverage and the dependence on a few people for
> testing exasperates this problem.
>=20
> So there is multiple layers to this. I think someone dedicates to the RM
> role would help this a lot because they would have a single community focu=
s
> mandate, so it is in their best interest to implement a flow which does no=
t
> inhibit their ability to deliver on their mandate.
>=20
> On Jun 30, 2017 12:53 PM, "Ron Wheeler" <rwheeler@artifact-software.com>
> wrote:
>=20
>> Perhaps a Release Tsar would be a better solution.
>> The RM needs to have absolute control over what is in or out.
>> Reasonable discussion allowed and then a decision once the RM feels that
>> the case has been fully explored and that a positive vote is expected.
>>=20
>> The importance on meeting deadlines needs to have a higher priority. If a=

>> feature/fix can not meet the quality/testing threshold on time then it ge=
ts
>> dropped from the RC and scheduled for the next release.
>>=20
>> A few cycles of a bit of ruthlessness should get everyone`s intention and=

>> shorten the release cycle.
>>=20
>> Meeting release schedules would also reduce the pain of a feature being
>> deferred.
>> According to the schedule proposed last year,(https://cwiki.apache.org
>> /confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/%5BPROPOSAL%5D+2016-2017+
>> Release+Cycle+and+Calendar)
>> Cloudstack 4.9.10 (LTS) , 5.04.0 (LTS) as well as 5.1.3.0 (maintenance)
>> 5.2.1.0 (Maintenance) were released June 2017.
>>=20
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Release+Procedure
>> seems to be pretty reasonable. The RM probably needs to moderate the vote=

>> and explain what -1 votes mean to product credibility if they delay the
>> release. Negative votes because someone`s new feature did not make it
>> should be ignored.
>>=20
>> Ron
>>=20
>>> On 30/06/2017 12:09 PM, Paul Angus wrote:
>>>=20
>>> We could probably split this topic down also....
>>>=20
>>> I think I may have mentioned previously =F0=9F=98=8A my view on how we h=
ave
>>> somewhat shot ourselves in the foot with the release process this time
>>> around.  I think that for the most part, people have been well intention=
ed,
>>> and have been trying to 'make this release as good as possible' which is=

>>> counter-productive, as it's been introducing new blockers.
>>>=20
>>> I'm not sure we have a problem in our 'loosely-agreed' process, it's jus=
t
>>> that repeatedly people have ignored it.
>>>=20
>>> WRT a full-time release manager, I suspect that they would find that "yo=
u
>>> can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink".  They would not=
 be
>>> able to compel anyone to 'hurry up and fix that bug you created', althou=
gh
>>> I guess maybe they could pull a feature if the author(s) didn't sort it o=
ut.
>>>=20
>>> Because ultimately a release manager, paid or otherwise should only be
>>> doing what the 'community' decides the release manager's role is.  So we=

>>> need to be clear about how we want releases to work before worrying abou=
t
>>> who manages that.
>>>=20
>>> Kind regards,
>>>=20
>>> Paul Angus
>>>=20
>>> paul.angus@shapeblue.com
>>> www.shapeblue.com
>>> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK
>>> @shapeblue
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Alex Hitchins [mailto:alex@alexhitchins.com]
>>> Sent: 30 June 2017 15:05
>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>>> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] - Releases, Project Management & Funding Thereof
>>>=20
>>> I am in complete agreement with you. Also on your other reply regards to=

>>> a FT release manager.
>>>=20
>>> If 'we' don't go down this line, more and more people will follow the
>>> Cosmic/Schuberg Philis path or even use Cosmic instead.
>>>=20
>>> I'm encouraged by your response. Sounds like a few others hold the same
>>> concerns.
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> Alexander Hitchins
>>> ------------------------
>>> E: alex@alexhitchins.com
>>> W: alexhitchins.com
>>> M: 07788 423 969
>>> T: 01892 523 587
>>>=20
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Will Stevens [mailto:williamstevens@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: 30 June 2017 14:54
>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>>> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] - Releases, Project Management & Funding Thereof
>>>=20
>>> Yes, Schuberg Philis, a very active community member forked Cosmic off o=
f
>>> CloudStack and has been developing their fork for their needs.
>>>=20
>>> I do think we need to have a more consistent front on this matter. I
>>> think it would make a big difference on the quality, release cadence and=

>>> perception of the project.
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> On Jun 30, 2017 9:48 AM, "Alex Hitchins" <alex@alexhitchins.com> wrote:
>>>=20
>>> Thanks Will,
>>>=20
>>> I understand it's something that comes with a big bag of troublesome
>>> worries.
>>>=20
>>> If this topic comes up again in any discussions, I'd be interested to
>>> hear their thoughts on what I see as the alternative; without a dedicate=
d
>>> RM/PM/Captain, people will fork off CS so they can achieve the same thin=
g,
>>> and CS ultimately looses out long term. I can't remember the name of the=

>>> fork, but I think I'm right that a previous large CS contributor/user
>>> forked off as they wanted greater management in the areas we are discuss=
ing
>>> here.
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> Alexander Hitchins
>>> ------------------------
>>> E: alex@alexhitchins.com
>>> W: alexhitchins.com
>>> M: 07788 423 969
>>> T: 01892 523 587
>>>=20
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Will Stevens [mailto:williamstevens@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: 30 June 2017 14:31
>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] - Releases, Project Management & Funding Thereof
>>>=20
>>> Apache has been historically against the idea of a cloudstack foundation=

>>> and there is a bit of a pandoras box there which we will want to be care=
ful
>>> about opening.
>>>=20
>>> Apache added direct contribution, but it was unusable for us historicall=
y
>>> because it required a minimum contribution of 50k, which none of us can
>>> afford. However, there have been some changes to the board recently whic=
h
>>> are in our favour if we want to put pressure to lower that to say 5-10k.=

>>>=20
>>> Even if we do solve for smaller direct contributions, we will have to
>>> jump through hoops to be able to use those funds for a dedicated release=

>>> manager. I do think this is a possibility if we manage our needs and
>>> communications very well. I had some preliminary discussions with some
>>> apache foundation folks to express these specific concerns. I played off=

>>> the fact that i know they dont want to entertain a cloudstack foundation=

>>> and tried to see if i could get them to move on the direct contribution
>>> mechanism to make it usable for us, specifically with the goal of hiring=
 a
>>> full time release manager. I definitely had their ear and they acknowled=
ged
>>> the problems we are facing (and currently discussing).  They expressed
>>> concerns about being able to hire someone with the direct contributions,=

>>> but brainstormed a bit to potentially hire an agency who actually does t=
he
>>> hire and they pay the persons salary through the agency with the direct
>>> contribution funds.
>>>=20
>>> All to say, there are potential options here, but there be dragons, so w=
e
>>> have to handle this topic with care.
>>>=20
>>> On Jun 30, 2017 9:12 AM, "Ron Wheeler" <rwheeler@artifact-software.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>=20
>>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/contributing.html says:
>>>> "If you have a specific target or project that you wish to directly
>>>> support, pleasecontact us <https://www.apache.org/founda
>>>> tion/contributing.html#Fundraising>and we will do our best to satisfy
>>>> your wishes."
>>>>=20
>>>> 1) Is Apache willing to allow projects to set up their own
>>>> foundations? I doubt but someone would need to check this out.
>>>> Does the PMC have the project charter or the agreement that was signed
>>>> when Cloudstack moved.
>>>>=20
>>>> 2) Has anyone tried to contact Apache about directing support to
>>>> Cloudstack.
>>>>=20
>>>> I am not convinced that lack of paid staff is the issue.
>>>> This discussion reminded me of this.
>>>> Q: How many psychiatrists does it take to change a lightbulb ?
>>>> A: Only one, but the lightbulb must want to change
>>>>=20
>>>> http://www.lightbulbjokes.com/directory/p.html
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>> Ron
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>> On 30/06/2017 6:48 AM, Alex Hitchins wrote:
>>>>=20
>>>> As per Giles's comment to the previous thread, I thought I would
>>>>> start a discussion on the subject to canvas peoples thoughts,
>>>>> opinions
>>>>>=20
>>>> and fears.
>>>=20
>>>> My question for discussion, is there is any mileage in someone
>>>>> creating a "CloudStack Foundation" as a non-profit entity, funded
>>>>> largely by key CloudStack players with the sole function of employing
>>>>> dedicated resource (part or full time) to handle all releases and
>>>>> other essential 'back office' functions. The idea being it's in
>>>>> everyone's interest to chip in a little each to fund core project and
>>>>>=20
>>>> release management.
>>>=20
>>>> The idea might be utterly irrelevant, pointless and/or straight up daft=
.
>>>>> I urge you all to let me know.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> Something for you all to think over this weekend.
>>>>>=20
>>>>>=20
>>>>> Alexander Hitchins
>>>>> ------------------------
>>>>> E: alex@alexhitchins.com
>>>>> W: alexhitchins.com
>>>>> M: 07788 423 969
>>>>> T: 01892 523 587
>>>>>=20
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Giles Sirett [mailto:giles.sirett@shapeblue.com]
>>>>> Sent: 30 June 2017 09:51
>>>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>>>>> Subject: RE: JIRA - PLEASE READ
>>>>>=20
>>>>> All
>>>>> This thread seems to have turned into 2 quite different discussions:
>>>>>=20
>>>>> 1. The use (or not) of Jira - which was the original discussion
>>>>>=20
>>>>> 2. Ways/means of encouraging (and paying for more structured
>>>>> contributors)
>>>>>=20
>>>>> I know that it could be argued that these are related. Could I
>>>>> suggest opening up a thread on "release and project management and
>>>>> funding it"  and keeping this thread to the original discussion
>>>>>=20
>>>>> (I will weigh in on both of these at some stage)
>>>>>=20
>>>>> Kind regards
>>>>> Giles
>>>>>=20
>>>>> giles.sirett@shapeblue.com
>>>>> www.shapeblue.com
>>>>> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK @shapeblue
>>>>>=20
>>>>>=20
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Alex Hitchins [mailto:alex@alexhitchins.com]
>>>>> Sent: 29 June 2017 18:49
>>>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: JIRA - PLEASE READ
>>>>>=20
>>>>> If it isn't being treated as a product it will be very impossible to
>>>>> market it as enterprise ready.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> I know we all know this.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> Similar sized projects under the Apache banner must have the same
>>>>> issue, what is the best way to gather experience of these projects?
>>>>> See how they handle these growing pains.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> A cloudstack foundation entity funded by companies earning from
>>>>> cloudstack seems a good way forward.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> Another tuppence, this is getting expensive.
>>>>>=20
>>>>>=20
>>>>>=20
>>>>> On 29 Jun 2017, at 18:18, Ron Wheeler
>>>>> <rwheeler@artifact-software.com>
>>>>>=20
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> I understand that it is a volunteer organization.
>>>>>> I do not know how many (if any) of the committers and PMC members
>>>>>> are funded by their organizations (allowed or ordered to work on
>>>>>> Cloudstack during company time) which is often the way that Apache
>>>>>> projects get staffed.
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> Clearly it is hard to tell someone who is being funded by a company
>>>>>> to fix a problem or who is working on their own time, to do or not
>>>>>> do something.
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> On the other hand, the PMC has to  build a community culture that is
>>>>>> good for the project.
>>>>>> That means describing a vision, planning and enforcing a roadmap,
>>>>>> and maintaining a focused project "marketing" effort.
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> There is a lot of extremely talented individuals working on
>>>>>> Cloudstack and it appears to have a very strong and valuable code-bas=
e.
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> To me the key question is about the PMC and the core committers'
>>>>>> ability to make Cloudstack a "product" that can compete for market
>>>>>> share and acceptance.
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> Is Cloudstack at a point in its development where it should be
>>>>>> treated like a product?
>>>>>> - sufficient functionality to compete
>>>>>> - sufficient user base to be a competitor in the market
>>>>>> - production reliability and stability
>>>>>> - business model for supporting companies to justify their continued
>>>>>> support
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> This may not require more effort but requires different policies and
>>>>>> different activities.
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> There has to be someone or a PMC  that can say "No".
>>>>>> - This change can not be included in this release because it will
>>>>>> delay the release.
>>>>>> - This change adds an unacceptable level of complexity
>>>>>> - This bug fix will have to wait for the next release because it is
>>>>>> too late to test it and fix the docs.
>>>>>> - This fix breaks the docs
>>>>>> - The release can not be made until this doc is updated.
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> Does the core group want to make it a competitive product or is it
>>>>>> sufficient for the interested players to continue in its current form=
?
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> Ron
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> On 29/06/2017 9:42 AM, Will Stevens wrote:
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> I personally don't know how Jira solves any of this, but assuming
>>>>>>> it does, fine...
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> The bigger problem which you have raised is that CloudStack has
>>>>>>> zero funding. So we can't hire a project manager, or a release
>>>>>>> manager or someone whose job it is to maintain documentation. I
>>>>>>> have been trying to find a way to, at the very least, fund a full
>>>>>>> time release manager who can focus 100% on the project. As the
>>>>>>> release manager for 4.9, I know it is a full time job. I did my
>>>>>>> best, but it is a ton of work and is hard to stay on top of.
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> Everyone contributing to CloudStack is donating their time. They
>>>>>>> can't make a living off supporting ACS, so every one is doing their
>>>>>>> best with the little time they can take away from their day job or
>>>>>>> their family life.
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> Yes, having clear guidelines and sticking to them helps, but
>>>>>>> without a solid CI infrastructure backing the project and improved
>>>>>>> testing and automation, we will always struggles with release
>>>>>>> schedules and such.
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> I have been involved in this project long enough to know that all
>>>>>>> the problems you point out exist, but they are also not easily solve=
d.
>>>>>>> Obviously we have to work with the initiatives we have and take
>>>>>>> small steps towards improvement, but we also have to be realistic
>>>>>>> with our expectations because we are counting on people's
>>>>>>> generosity to move them forward.
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> Simplifying moving parts and streamlining the process will lead to
>>>>>>> more contribution because there is less barriers to entry. This one
>>>>>>> reason why I struggle to see the value in Jira as it is used today.
>>>>>>> I personally don't understand what value it is giving us that the
>>>>>>> github PRs and Issues don't solve.
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> I will remain open minded and will follow along with what people
>>>>>>> think is best, but I think it is worth understanding what we are
>>>>>>> trying to solve for and simplify our approach in solving it so we
>>>>>>> can get better systems in place.
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> On Jun 29, 2017 9:17 AM, "Ron Wheeler"
>>>>>>> <rwheeler@artifact-software.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> As a real outsider, IMHO Paul is right.
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>> At times it seems that Cloudstack is a coding hobby rather than a
>>>>>>>> project or a production quality product.
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>> Who decides what goes into a release? How does this affect the
>>>>>>>> release schedule?
>>>>>>>> Who is responsible for meeting the "published" roadmap (of which
>>>>>>>> there seem to be many) of releases?
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>> How is a system admin that is not part of the project supposed to
>>>>>>>> plan for upgrade windows?
>>>>>>>> How does one know when a feature, bug fix or release will be
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> available?
>>>=20
>>>> How does the PMC  manage function creep  in a release, maintain
>>>>>>>> quality and consistency, reject changes that hurt the overall
>>>>>>>> vision or add too much complexity?
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>> No one seems to care about documentation but if someone did, how
>>>>>>>> would they stop undocumented features or features that contradict
>>>>>>>> the documentation from being incorporated?
>>>>>>>> Who makes sure that the documentation is correct at the time of
>>>>>>>> the release?
>>>>>>>> Release notes are not much help for someone doing a new install or
>>>>>>>> evaluating Cloudstack.
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>> Without a JIRA entry, how does an end-user who encounters a
>>>>>>>> problem know that it has been fixed already in the next release?
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>> Without a JIRA entry, how does the community comment on a proposed
>>>>>>>> change before it gets coded?
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>> If changes are going to be accepted without a JIRA, is there a
>>>>>>>> definition of a minor fix that does not require a JIRA?
>>>>>>>> - does not change functionality?
>>>>>>>> - only affects an "edge case" or cleans up an exception that is
>>>>>>>> not properly handled?
>>>>>>>> - only improves code readability or future extensibility?
>>>>>>>> - does not affect documentation?
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>> Apache projects that are popular and enjoy wide support do have
>>>>>>>> strong management.
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>> There are other examples where great Apache software is failing to
>>>>>>>> get recognized because the PMC is not paying attention to the
>>>>>>>> product management side of things.
>>>>>>>> I use Apache Jackrabbit which is a quality product with a strong
>>>>>>>> technical team supporting it.
>>>>>>>> It has very little following because the documentation and
>>>>>>>> marketing collateral is very poor.
>>>>>>>> It gets by because the audience for it is largely software
>>>>>>>> developers who can read code and can test features to work out the
>>>>>>>> functionality.
>>>>>>>> It would get a lot more attention if they paid attention to the
>>>>>>>> product management side of the project.
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>> Cloudstack needs to avoid this situation and unfortunately this
>>>>>>>> takes effort and some discipline.
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>> Ron
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>> On 29/06/2017 8:03 AM, Will Stevens wrote:
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>> Why are we still using jira instead of the PRs for that
>>>>>>>>> communication? Can we not use issues in github now instead of
>>>>>>>>> jira if someone needs to open an issue but does not yet have code
>>>>>>>>> to contribute. If not, jira could still be used for that.
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>> I think duplicating data between jira and the PR is kind of
>>>>>>>>> pointless. I feel like the github PRs and the cide going in
>>>>>>>>> should be the source of truth, not a random third party tool.
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>> For the 4.9 release notes, i built a tool to generate the release
>>>>>>>>> notes from the PRs merged in that release. I think that is easier
>>>>>>>>> and more accurate than depending on jira since it does not track
>>>>>>>>> the actual code tree.
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>> Thats my 0.02$.
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>> On Jun 29, 2017 5:25 AM, "Paul Angus" <paul.angus@shapeblue.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>> Such a view of CloudStack is what holds CloudStack back.
>>>>>>>>> It stops users/operators from having any chance of understanding
>>>>>>>>> what CloudStack does and how it does it.
>>>>>>>>> Code for code's sake is no use to anyone.
>>>>>>>>> Jira is about communication between developers and to everyone els=
e.
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>> Paul Angus
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>> paul.angus@shapeblue.com
>>>>>>>>> www.shapeblue.com
>>>>>>>>> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK @shapeblue
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>>> From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogland@gmail.com]
>>>>>>>>> Sent: 29 June 2017 10:14
>>>>>>>>> To: dev <dev@cloudstack.apache.org>
>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: JIRA - PLEASE READ
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Paul Angus
>>>>>>>>> <paul.angus@shapeblue.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>> + Release notes will be impossible to create without a proper
>>>>>>>>> + Jira
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>> history.
>>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>> And no one will know what has gone into CloudStack.
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>> No they are not mr Grumpy. they should be base on the code
>>>>>>>>>> anyway,
>>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>> hence on git, not jira. I do not appose to the use of Jira but it
>>>>>>>>> is not required for good coding practices and as we are not and
>>>>>>>>> will not function as a corporation, jira is an extra for those
>>>>>>>>> that grave for it. not a requirement.
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Daan
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>=20