There was one other thing I saw come through regarding KVM bridges, that should probably be added as well, but I haven't looked at it extensively, maybe someone else can confirm.
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Sebastien Goasguen <run...@gmail.com> wrote: > Maybe before we get to carried away talking about future releases and more > automated testing (which is great and many of us have advocating for and > Prasanna has done outstanding working on BVT, jenkins and the test matrix), > we need to focus on how to get 4.2 out. > > Marcus has a binding -1, so that means the vote fails and we need another RC > (unless someone challenges Marcus's veto and he changes his mind). > > So what needs to be in the RC (aside from the cherry pick mentioned by > Marcus). > Are there more blockers ? > Do we need to invest in more testing before cutting that new RC or is it just > that one cherry pick ? > > If we agree on that and test before cutting, then maybe the vote can pass :) > > -sebastien > > > On Sep 9, 2013, at 4:47 PM, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Why can't we cover every use case, Marcus. We will need help from >> users, but if they do help it will be easy to do so. >> >> On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 10:43 PM, Marcus Sorensen <shadow...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I was actually talking about separate things in relation to this >>> thread and the other where I mentioned that I'd like to see a release >>> focused on bugfixing and testing. With that, I'm advocating a test for >>> every api call and focusing on broadening use case test coverage. >>> >>> Here, I'm simply talking about taking the support matrix and doing >>> some vary basic testing. This can be a dozen or so tests, each >>> platform we say we support needs to successfully deploy a zone and a >>> vm on every storage type that is in the support matrix. I don't think >>> this would include plugins (or maybe those are left to the developer >>> of the third party plugin). For KVM, this is literally a marvin script >>> away from being there, I don't think there's a ton of work. I have no >>> idea what we have or can do with vmware, and I'm guessing Xen is >>> largely covered already. >>> >>> We'll never be able to cover every use case, I may be able to deploy a >>> zone with my KVM setup, but not someone else's special network layout. >>> I'd just like to see sanity checks to say it works, at all, on the >>> handful of 'supported' systems. >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Mike Tutkowski >>> <mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote: >>>> Do we have any statistics that say how many of our customers are using >>>> feature x, feature y, etc.? >>>> >>>> If not, I would say if we know about a feature that has regressed to the >>>> point of breakage in 4.2 that it should be fixed before releasing (or at >>>> the very least well documented, so - if it is impactful to someone - they >>>> do not upgrade until it has been fixed). >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Chiradeep Vittal < >>>> chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I think that Animesh is trying to stress what is "key". If it hits 1% of >>>>> cloud operators is it key? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 9/9/13 7:42 AM, "Simon Weller" <swel...@ena.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> -1 from me as well. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I know we're trying to hit timed releases, but I think it's very >>>>>> important to preserve key underlying functionality across releases. If a >>>>>> supported and documented feature is known to be broken, we need to >>>>>> address it...if we don't, it's going to cause lots of pain, and reflect >>>>>> badly on ACS as a project. >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>> >>>>>> From: "Chip Childers" <chip.child...@sungard.com> >>>>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org >>>>>> Sent: Monday, September 9, 2013 9:24:23 AM >>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round) >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 12:40:30AM -0600, Marcus Sorensen wrote: >>>>>>> -1 ... sorry guys, especially with Simon chiming in. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'd request f2c5b5fbfe45196dfad2821fca513ddd6efa25c9 be cherry-picked. >>>>>> >>>>>> Agreed. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm -1, given simon's perspective as well. Since we have the fix, let's >>>>>> get it into the release. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> *Mike Tutkowski* >>>> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* >>>> e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com >>>> o: 303.746.7302 >>>> Advancing the way the world uses the >>>> cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play> >>>> *™* >
