On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 06:45:39AM +0000, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Mathias Mullins [mailto:mathias.mull...@citrix.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2013 5:40 PM > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Edison Su > > Subject: Re: Swift in 4.2 is broken, anybody wants it to be supported in > > 4.2? > > > > I've been watching from the outside and tracking the entire discussion, > > and with what has happened with the delays with 4.0 and 4.1 am worried > > that this could be come the next delayer to the release of 4.2. At the > > same time, I'm very much in agreement with David N., Chip and John B. > > that we can't just drop a feature because it hasn't been attiquately > > tested in that past releases. > > > > My observations - > > 1. There is not a quick fix here. > > 2. We don't know who can do it. > > 3. We're not sure how to do it properly > > 4. Currently we can't even agree on whether we go with the original > > version or the newer one. > > 5. We can't validate user base immediate need and requirement for the > > feature. > > 6. We're stuck in Analysis paralysis! > > > > Conclusion - If we don't get past these in short order we are going to > > jeopardize 4.2 timely release. > > > > Suggestion: > > Based off my work with other (corporate) software releases, if we can't > > validate the immediate need, we don't know the immediate fix, and we > > don't have the right people to do it should we slate this for 4.2.1 and > > lower this to a Major for 4.2? We don't delay a major release, and at > > the same time we dedicate ourselves to not stranding a user. We need to > > do this, but at this point we need to do it right for that user base > > too. > > > > We work to fix the previous version and we work to support new versions. > > We get the right resources in to assist, and we make it an immediate > > priority to address. If we can fix and test properly before the cut of > > 4.2, WONDERFUL! If not, then it doesn't block the release, but it goes > > out with 4.2.1 asap. > > > > So there's my ramblings. How far off base am I? :-) > > > > Ready, setŠ fire! > > Matt > > > [Animesh>] Mathias thanks for a detailed and clear description. I agree if we > can fix it fine but if not it should not block 4.2. Given that we are 3 weeks > away from code freeze any uncertainties either needs to be addressed or we > need to defer them.
Based on CLOUDSTACK-3350, we have a known user. IMO, this should be a blocker. We should either fix Swift to support users or revert the object store branch merge changes.
