cloudstack-marketing mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mathias Mullins <>
Subject Re: [WEBSITE] Release support lifetime and related content
Date Tue, 12 Mar 2013 18:13:54 GMT

Are you thinking of leaving this in the wiki or formalizing this out to a
static page and then updating it as reviews come through? I would think
for the website and this being very definitive data that this might
constitute a static page rather than living in the wiki.

I think the content is good, There were a couple points I had questions

1. In the break out of the schedule under "Feature Release Cycle", do you
want to put a timing for how long a initial vote will last, how secondary
votes would happen (if needed) and how long after release the merge back
to the master will happen? Those could be talked bout without talking to
when a release would happen. I know being new to the project that has
always been kinda confusing to me.

2. Another thing that is a little confusing (and this could be because I'm
not a coder) is that the graphics seem to contradict each other about when
the code merges back to the master. The second graphic under "Release
Branch Lifecycle" shows coming off the master, but doesn't show a merge
back to the master when that release is concluded. Is that intentional?
This may be a learning question on my side.


On 3/12/13 1:30 PM, "Chip Childers" <> wrote:

>On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 05:15:12PM +0000, Musayev, Ilya wrote:
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Chip Childers []
>> > Sent: Monday, March 11, 2013 9:07 PM
>> > To:
>> > Subject: [WEBSITE] Release support lifetime and related content
>> > 
>> > Hi all,
>> > 
>> > In working on some changes to the "Releases" section of the wiki, I
>> > together some information that we may want to publish to the website.
>> > 
>> > At a minimum, I think that it would be useful to have a statement of
>> > support model somewhere (perhaps the downloads page).
>> > 
>> > Take a look here:
>> > 
>> >
>> > 
>> > -chip
>> I read it over several times. Just need you to confirm that this is
>>final and approved.
>> I'd like to update Wikipedia and reference this doc as source.
>So in projects like this, there's no such thing as *final*.  We only have
>current consensus.  However, I think that it's reasonable to consider
>this to be the current consensus (otherwise I wouldn't have documented
>it... ;-) ).

View raw message