H Ilya, I am working on a paralel track. At Schuberg Philis we have a version that contains some code from 4.2 and a patch that I cannot get committed to master. I don't want to release this in the open, but am interested in your considerations on the subject.
regards, Daan On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Musayev, Ilya <imusa...@webmd.net> wrote: > Oops, wrong url for github, correct url is: > > http://www.guthub.com/serverchief/cloudsand > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Musayev, Ilya [mailto:imusa...@webmd.net] >> Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2013 11:52 AM >> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org >> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Should we be releasing -beta releases? >> >> I run my own hybrid version of 4.1 and with some features of 4.2 in >> production, since - I needed to backport some features of 4.2 into 4.1 >> >> Since this version was not officially released under ACS, I branded it as >> CloudSand (powered by Apache CloudStack). >> >> You can see the code here: >> http://www.guthub.com/serverchief.com/cloudsand | www. >> Cloudsand.com >> >> At some point, I would like to release a "RC/beta" of CloudSand 4.2 on my >> own, if anyone wants to join the effort, please ping me :) >> >> Thanks >> Ilya >> >> >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Nux! [mailto:n...@li.nux.ro] >> > Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2013 8:06 AM >> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org >> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Should we be releasing -beta releases? >> > >> > On 14.05.2013 15:41, Chip Childers wrote: >> > > As a way to get more user feedback on our major feature releases, >> > > what does everyone think about releasing one or two -beta releases >> > > for each major feature release? >> > > >> > > This might fall in line with some of the stated concerns about our >> > > release schedule (see [1]). I've stated a desire to be quicker >> > > about our releases (my vote was 4 months). I've also been saying >> > > quite publicly that we should never release if we know about upgrade >> > > issues (that's the cost of having actual users of our project, which >> > > I'm more than willing for us to pay). >> > > >> > > Perhaps -betaX releases would be helpful to get attention from the >> > > users to test the release (including upgrade paths). The stated >> > > assumption could be: -beta releases are not releases that can be >> > > upgraded *from*, but are intended to help support testing by end >> > > users that want to check the upcoming release against their expected >> > > feature set and upgrade path. >> > > >> > > I would see the first -beta-1 being released about 1 month after >> > > feature freeze. For example, for 4.2.0, it would be on 2013-06-30. >> > > I would only do a -beta-2 (or later) beta release if required due to >> > > testing results. I would also suggest that the -beta-* releases >> > > would >> > > *not* have any particular quality criteria (well... perhaps >> > > minimal, like blocking on issues that fundamentally make the >> > > software unstable). >> > > >> > > I'm not sure about my own proposal here, but I wanted to throw it >> > > out and see if any of you have feedback / thoughts. >> > > >> > > -chip >> > > >> > > [1] http://markmail.org/message/3ctdwor5hfbpa3vx >> > >> > +1 for beta releases, I was actually thinking of building some RPMS >> > from source, want to get a flavour of 4.2 features, but not sure if I >> > can be bothered with that. If I had some nightlies or betas available >> > on cloudstack.apt-get.eu I'd definitely give it a go. >> > >> > Lucian >> > >> > -- >> > Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! >> > >> > Nux! >> > www.nux.ro >
