I am pernickety (or annoying, depending on who you ask!) so thank you for your patience. :)
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Chip Childers <chip.child...@sungard.com>wrote: > Noah, > > I appreciate your attention to detail here, but I think you are > reading too much into these developer builds. > > We agreed to use the betaX string earlier on the list, but really only > for the purpose of having a distinguishing characteristic in the file > names. That's all they are for. I'm actually going to stop doing > these builds anyway... we're close to a vote on 4.0.0, and the value > they have provided is basically down to nil right now. We can review > jenkins.cs.o artifacts for any actual bugs. > > It's also not the approach we should be taking after 4.0.0. I really > liked the way that couchdb does it, and want to spend the time to > instrument the build process similarly. We're just not going to get > to that prior to 4.0.0, and I don't think it's critical to do it by > then. > > As you've suggested previously, any VOTE thread will be started with > 4.0.0 versioned build artifacts. When / if we end up with a second, > third, fourth attempt, they will be the same version number. > > Cheers! > > -chip > > On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 4:19 PM, Noah Slater <nsla...@tumbolia.org> wrote: > > Okay, thanks for the clarification. I've brought it up a few times (as > you > > say) and each time it sounded like it was going to change, but then in > > another thread, a newer build pops up with it in the tarball name, so I > > keep wondering what it means. :) > > > > > > On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 9:10 PM, Chip Childers <chip.child...@sungard.com > >wrote: > > > >> No, we are trying to ship 4.0.0. > >> > >> Yes, we have it documented on the wiki (on my phone, so it's not easy > >> to search for the url right now). > >> > >> The "beta" thing is a hack, as we've discussed on several threads now. > >> > >> > >> - chip > >> > >> Sent from my iPhone. > >> > >> On Oct 7, 2012, at 2:55 PM, Noah Slater <nsla...@tumbolia.org> wrote: > >> > >> > Chip, > >> > > >> > Just to confirm, is 4.0.0.beta6 the official version number we want to > >> ship? > >> > > >> > How will we increment this? What scheme are we using? Is it > documented? > >> > > >> > On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 1:53 AM, Chip Childers < > chip.child...@sungard.com > >> >wrote: > >> > > >> >> Hi all, > >> >> > >> >> I've posted a new build (4.0.0.beta6) here: > >> >> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/cloudstack/4.0/ > >> >> > >> >> This code was taken from the 4.0 branch, commit > >> >> 384c03e42578f17432a483d5828aad64175d9c49. > >> >> > >> >> Please test the build using our release test procedure documented > >> >> here: > >> >> > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+test+procedure > >> >> > >> >> The release was built using these instructions: > >> >> > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Release+Procedure > >> >> Once exception is that we do not have a CHANGES file yet. I will > >> >> have that in place prior to calling for an official vote. > >> >> > >> >> Please do take the opportunity to run through the test process (as > >> >> documented), and raise bugs if you find anything that you would > >> >> consider to be a release blocker during the actual voting process. > >> >> > >> >> Thanks in advance... and happy testing! > >> >> > >> >> -chip > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > NS > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > NS > -- NS
