cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com>
Subject Re: Why CloudStack 5
Date Thu, 24 Jan 2019 04:28:23 GMT
I'm in the favour of keeping the 4.x going because no API compatibility is broken, and as long
as we are following semver there is no need. Calling a 4.x a 5.x just for the sake of bumping
versions may cause some perception issue.

Removal of unsupported/poc/incomplete features, plugins including APIs should not constitute
breaking of compatibility. Several network and hypervisor plugins are still in poc/incomplete/unmaintained
state.

Unless the API layer, and perhaps DB layer is re-architected there is no point in calling
the next version 5.x as long as semver is followed.

In my opinion, the next major version 5.0 should have a restful versioned API layer, a new
DB+upgrade framework that may support multiple db servers, a new UI, sandboxed plugin framework
(right now a plugin can do anything it wants to say the cloud db), a new agent-clustering
framework (the current low level nio and rpc code goes away), a distributed message bus and
locking service (that we thought to introduce in 4.2,4.3 but incomplete), and refactor the
networking/VR layer with a new VR. Not to mention cleanup some technical debt. The keywords
being major architectural and api/integrational changes. Some of this maybe on-going, but
we'll get to 5.x with patience over time.

Regards,
Rohit Yadav

________________________________
From: Ivan Kudryavtsev <kudryavtsev_ia@bw-sw.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2019 9:15:29 AM
To: users; dev
Subject: Why CloudStack 5

I decided whether to write it several weeks thinking about the stones and
rotten potatoes, but still decided to do that. Hope it will not raise the
stress level.

Colleagues and ACS leaders, I would like to initiate the discussion. Why go
to CS5 rather than stay with 4.XX. Some thoughts are:

1. According to the versioning guide, the first number stands for radical
changes like if the community decided to go from current ORM to Hibernate.
I don't see the capabilities for such changes and there are no intentions
for the implementation.

2. I can realize that we 'stuck' with '4.XX' and the marketing can be
disappointing from that point of view. Then, OK, let's just skip the first
number "4." and release, ACS 13.X, 14.X, 15.X and so on. Every version will
receive new impressing version number and everyone could be happy about
that.

Going to version "5" currently looks like as an intention to refresh but
with very poor motivation. At least to me.

The discussion is strongly welcome.



--
With best regards, Ivan Kudryavtsev
Bitworks LLC
Cell RU: +7-923-414-1515
Cell USA: +1-201-257-1512
WWW: http://bitworks.software/ <http://bw-sw.com/>

rohit.yadav@shapeblue.comĀ 
www.shapeblue.com
Amadeus House, Floral Street, London  WC2E 9DPUK
@shapeblue
  
 

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