incubator-cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chip Childers <chip.child...@sungard.com>
Subject Re: [MERGE][ACS41] javelin to master
Date Mon, 28 Jan 2013 15:24:46 GMT
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 10:17 AM, John Burwell <jburwell@basho.com> wrote:
> All,
>
> I echo Marcus' concerns regarding the timing of such a "high touch" change landing in
master.  We are two days before code freeze.  What 4.1.0 features/capabilities are gained
by merging javelin?  Can someone speak to the regression test strategy that has been employed
to verify the stability of the changes?
>
> I proposed 2pm today (28 Jan 2013) [1] to meet on #cloudstack-meeting to continue our
storage design conversation.

Alex - Is it more logical to merge into master after we cut the 4.1 branch?

>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
> [1] http://markmail.org/message/xivs7fuompr3n3o6
>
> On Jan 27, 2013, at 8:21 PM, Kelven Yang <kelven.yang@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> I put a wiki article about this at,
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Using+Spring+in+Clou
>> dStack
>>
>>
>> It explains some of the motivations for trying Spring in javelin together
>> with the architecture cleanup work, as Alex has pointed, it does not
>> change the business logic behind, the effort of the work is to lay out a
>> more open foundation for future CloudStack evolution.
>>
>> Kelven
>>
>>
>> On 1/26/13 9:52 AM, "Alex Huang" <Alex.Huang@citrix.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>> Do you have consensus on the storage piece?
>>>> I didn't walk away from the storage meeting with the impression that
>>>> consensus had been achieved, and there's another meeting on it next
>>>> week...
>>>>
>>>
>>> We did not reach yet because John had something to take care of.  We
>>> agreed to hold another meeting.  In principle, I think John's ideas and
>>> the new storage engine are not far apart.  We're going to go into
>>> specific design on the next meeting to verify that.
>>>
>>> That is what I'm trying to point out here.  We should look at javelin as
>>> the piece that just brings Spring support.  It's high touch but minimal
>>> effect on business logic.  We can reach consensus on whether to bring in
>>> the storage hookup piece when Edison ask to merge that branch in.
>>>
>>> --Alex
>>>
>>
>

Mime
View raw message