My only concern was testing. Looks like that's handled. Let's roll with it.
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 06:15:33PM +0000, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote: > Ilya, Chip > > Are your concerns addressed? If so I would like to proceed with adding this > upgrade path. > > Animesh > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Animesh Chaturvedi [mailto:animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com] > > Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 3:54 PM > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Upgrade path to ACS 4.2 from CCP > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Musayev, Ilya [mailto:imusa...@webmd.net] > > > Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 2:13 PM > > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > > > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Upgrade path to ACS 4.2 from CCP > > > > > > Animesh, > > > > > > Would this have any effect on non-CCP installations? > > [Animesh>] No CCP -> ACS upgrade path files will not affects ACS->ACS > > upgrade path > > > > > > I see this move as a positive thing and it would be ideal to have in > > > 4.2, but we don't want to risk stability, hence I'm curious on the > > > safety and possible issues for non-CCP users. > > > > > > Thanks > > > ilya > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Animesh Chaturvedi [mailto:animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com] > > > > Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 4:43 PM > > > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > > > > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Upgrade path to ACS 4.2 from CCP > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] > > > > > Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:39 AM > > > > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > > > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Upgrade path to ACS 4.2 from CCP > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 10:01:02PM +0000, Animesh Chaturvedi > > wrote: > > > > > > [Animesh>] Yes this seems late for 4.2, but it makes it easier > > > > > > to add > > > > > support now. If there is objection we can track it for 4.3. > > > > > > > > > > Are you sure it's easier to add support now? That basically puts > > > > > us in a position where it's *possible* to attempt it. That means > > > > > we have to test it, because if things go wrong then we are in a > > > > > mess > > > for 4.3. > > > > > > > > > > Am I getting it wrong? > > > > [Animesh>] Yes it is one upgrade path from 3.0.7 to 4.1 and follow > > > > through same upgrade path from 4.1 to 4.2 with couple of SQL files > > > > only. . Upgrade from 3.0,4-> 3.0.7 has already been tested in CCP > > > > releases and becomes the checkpoint. It was planned to be tested for > > > > CCP anyway. Sudha do you see it as a concern. Again if community > > > > thinks it is late, we can track for 4.3 > > > > >
