Abihnandan, Why not include the output of the query instead of the query? I think this is what Sebastien means. A list of the important ones can still be prepended in more readable form afaic.
Daan On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 1:32 PM, Abhinandan Prateek <abhinandan.prat...@citrix.com> wrote: > For listing down the fixed issues, since there are ~175 of these. I will > list down some important fixes. > Followed by the query to give a exhaustive list, is that acceptable ? > > For known issues will look at the 4.3/4.2 open tickets list down the > important ones. > > This will go in the CHANGES in source repo and RN in code repo. > > > -abhi > > On 15/11/13 5:54 pm, "Abhinandan Prateek" <abhinandan.prat...@citrix.com> > wrote: > >>To address the concern of RN we will not conclude the vote on RC (i.e. Not >>make a release) >>till the RN in general and upgrade instructions in particular are also of >>acceptable quality. >>As for other inconsistencies will work towards ironing those out. >> >>-abhi >> >>On 15/11/13 3:30 pm, "Sebastien Goasguen" <run...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>>On Nov 15, 2013, at 4:43 AM, Abhinandan Prateek >>><abhinandan.prat...@citrix.com> wrote: >>> >>>> As a RM I had agreed to Sebatian's suggestion of fixing the docs >>>>specially >>>> the upgrade section of it. >>>> And off course doing a GA after the docs are fixed is on the cards. >>>> >>>> As for the list of fixed and known issues I was told that a filter is >>>>good >>>> enough but it should be pretty easy to get the listing in the docs >>>>itself. >>>> If someone has specific preferences it is easy to fix that. >>>> >>>> So it boils down to get opinion from folks on the following: >>>> >>>> 1. RC build, this does not contain docs. I have seen no complains or >>>> issues here. >>> >>>That's fine, but releasing something without the upgrade instructions >>>committed is bad. >>>Even if the release of such upgrade instructions happen after the release >>>of the code. >>> >>>> >>>> 2. Putting a full listing of bug fixes in RN Vs a filter. Even I will >>>> think full listing is good or a query (instead of a URL?) >>>> >>> >>>I am in favor of consistency. Prior to 4.2 we listed all BUGS explicitly. >>>We should keep doing that. >>> >>>> 3. Upgrade instructions are known to be bad and we will have to wait at >>>> least till Wednesday to get these right. >>>> We have some volunteers already working on those and their effort is >>>> highly appreciated. >>> >>>Right, and since there is no rush, why not wait a bit till we can all >>>look this with cool heads, double check the RN, bugs listing, upgrade >>>instructions etc... >>> >>>> >>>> -abhi >>>> >>>> >>>> On 15/11/13 2:50 pm, "Daan Hoogland" <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> So the -1 is because of the lack of rn and upgrade path docs, right, I >>>>> think I proposed earlier this thread to release after the doc >>>>> hackathon privided that. I wasn't really explicit about it I think as >>>>> no one commented on this strategy. Would that be acceptable to you all >>>>> (especially David and Sebastien)? >>>>> >>>>> I agree btw that docs must be available, but I don't think these have >>>>> to be as stable as the release. We should allow for improving the docs >>>>> on a release if needed. The net result of what I am proposing is that >>>>> there will be a release and a docs rc. This is what the splitting of >>>>> of the docs was about in my view,. Makes sense? >>>>> >>>>> If not, we should not try to make CCC Europe with 4.2.1. I think this >>>>> is what the hurry is about >>>>> >>>>> Daan >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Sebastien Goasguen <run...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> I might be behind on the discussions here, but I will veto an RC that >>>>>> does not have list of bugs fixed and proper upgrade path documented >>>>>> (minimum of a fix from 4.2.0 upgrade docs). Separate repo of the docs >>>>>>or >>>>>> not. >>>>>> >>>>>> Right now I see that the bugs fix list points to a jira filter. This >>>>>>is >>>>>> not consistent with the way it was done in prior releases (explicit >>>>>> listing) and in 4.2 (which pointed to the RN). We need consistency. >>>>>>What >>>>>> happens if someone changes this jira filter ? >>>>>> >>>>>> I also would like to see the results of the test matrix for 4.2.1 >>>>>> running within jenkins.buildacloud.org. This >>>>>> http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/view/cloudstack-qa/ runs against >>>>>>master >>>>>> and has been failing for a while. >>>>>> >>>>>> PS: I did test it and did the usual smoke test >>>>>> >>>>>> so -1 (binding) at this time >>>>>> >>>>>> -sebastien >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Nov 14, 2013, at 4:20 PM, Chip Childers <chipchild...@apache.org> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Except that the separation only helps if it allows RC testing + >>>>>>>voting >>>>>>> during doc finalization. If we announce before docs, it hurts us. >>>>>>> I'm against another announcement that goes out with the docs in poor >>>>>>> shape. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 3:44 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi >>>>>>> <animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> Unless there are objection to the RC, I would prefer to have it >>>>>>>> released and make the announcement sooner and showcase in collab >>>>>>>> conference. As Chip mentions docs were broken out separately >>>>>>>>anyway. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Animesh >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 14/11/13 8:12 pm, "Sebastien Goasguen" <run...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Anyway we can wait next week to release. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> quite a few of us will be together in Amsterdam, we can dedicate a >>>>>>>>> hackathon session to 4.2.1 , make sure RN are good, upgrade path >>>>>>>>> etcŠthen testŠ. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'd recommend keeping the vote open until then. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -sebastien >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Nov 14, 2013, at 5:57 AM, Radhika Puthiyetath >>>>>>>>> <radhika.puthiyet...@citrix.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The master has the most up-to-date RN for 4.2.1. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> From: Abhinandan Prateek >>>>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2013 2:22 PM >>>>>>>>>> To: CloudStack Dev >>>>>>>>>> Cc: Radhika Puthiyetath >>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ASF4.2.1] Release Notes >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It seems the upgrade section of release notes will require a >>>>>>>>>>review, >>>>>>>>>> probably followed by a revamp (?). >>>>>>>>>> Can we have some volunteers who are familiar with various upgrade >>>>>>>>>> paths comment on it ? >>>>>>>>>> Me and Radhika will try to consolidate those comments, snippets >>>>>>>>>>and >>>>>>>>>> fix the RN for 4.2.1. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -abhi >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> RN for 4.2.1 = >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack-docs.git;a=tr >>>>>>>>>>e >>>>>>>>>>e; >>>>>>>>>> f >>>>>>>>>> =re >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>lease-notes;h=8128d62c39236331492f3642914bf97b43ed2670;hb=refs/hea >>>>>>>>>>d >>>>>>>>>>s/ >>>>>>>>>> 4 >>>>>>>>>> .2 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
