On Oct 8, 2012, at 2:56 PM, Chip Childers wrote: > Hi all, > > It appears to have been a busy weekend for many of us, so I wanted to > start a quick discuss thread to see where the community thinks we > stand regarding a 4.0.0 release VOTE. With Alex headed out on > vacation after today, he asked if I could take over the release > management roll this week (of course, if someone has an objection to > that, feel free to shout!). > > Here were the outstanding issues that I noted from last week. Perhaps > we can get updates from the various community members working on the > items? > > CLOUDSTACK-257: AWS Api is not correctly deployed > The bug is marked as resolved right now, but that there is still some > activity on the bug to get it to closure. Can someone please comment > on the status of this work?
Chip, I went through the whole testing procedure for 4.0.0.beta6 and everything worked fine, I also built marvin and configure devcloud with it. I then tried to test ec2/s3 and indeed there was an issue with the user registration for AWS. I can test it again with a new build. -Sebastien > > CLOUDSTACK-267: Migration of VM in KVM host is not happening because... > Edison, you marked this bug as closed and that it was fixed in > c8afd816965786441e4b6f855b141d7515f15f6a. Was this patch applied to > the 4.0 branch? If so, should we update the fix version to be 4.0.0? > If not, should it be applied to 4.0? > > Release Notes and CHANGES file: > Radhika asked a couple of questions on another thread, which need to > be answered. Can someone point me to the draft content, so that I can > create a CHANGES file more easily? Personally, I'm OK with getting > the more formal release notes completed (and posted to our website) > during the voting process. It would have been better to have wrapped > all of the docs for the release as part of the release itself (since > it's in the source tree), but as long as we post it as soon as > possible on the website we'll be OK. > > I would also suggest that we consider a 4.0.1 release that includes > the completed docs (and nothing else). I think that once we get > ourselves through our first official release process, we shouldn't be > shy with releasing new minor updates. > > Last, if there are any other concerns / outstanding items / thoughts > that people want to share, please do. I'd love to be in a position to > cut an actual 4.0.0 release candidate today, and start the VOTE > thread. However, we want to be sure that we've buttoned up as much as > possible. > > -chip
