> -----Original Message-----
> From: Animesh Chaturvedi [mailto:animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 2:04 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 1:46 PM
> > To: dev
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
> >
> > I think we are hitting a well documented feature of open source here,
> > Mike. If someone is reporting it, someone is testing it. if someone is
> > testing it someone is using it. Meaning the reported issues are being
> > used. If it is by one or by one percent is not or should not be
> > important.
> > The fact they are slowing the release is because the testing is slow
> > and hardly automated. Those that are automated are no issue.
> >
> > @Animesh: you are giving an argument for releasing release candidates.
> > We have discussed the cons of that extensively. The fact that 4.2 is
> > so loaded with new features is due to the slow testing. I see your
> > point about new issues, but these are due to 'only having 72 hours'
> [Animesh>] I did extend the fourth VOTE which was expected to close on
> Friday. I also deliberately did not cancel out the third round sooner
> and start a new VOTE because I also wanted more people to try out the RC
> even though I had to pull in few fixes.
> > per vote round for things that are not automatically tested. Maybe you
> > are right and we should leave some behind to save the whole.
> [Animesh>] That's my reasoning, the current issue we already have a fix
> so easy to spin another RC but that may not just be the end. IMO as we
> put in the RC date for a release we should also put in a GA date that we
> should strive to achieve as community.
[Animesh>] We also need to consider all the users that have been waiting to
leverage the new release.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 10:24 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>
> > > *(tm)*
