Are you serious? You consider to revert a PR that was merged over 6 months ago? And expect it to become more stable?
The problem, in MHO, is not that we find bugs that we consider blockers. The problem is we are unable to resolve them effectively because master is unstable. There currently isn’t a single PR that solves it, hence there is no way to test PRs. This is because we have many PRs open and they were all branched off of a master that doesn’t work. I simply can't test proposed PRs. This problem occurred about 3 weeks ago, because before that master worked and we could solve issues and merge PRs. I’m not saying it was bug-free, but at least we could work on stabilising it. Most likely, we accepted a “fix” that made things worse. Probably even multiple of them. To get out of this, I think we need to combine a few PRs that make it stable. I’ll have a look today with Wilder and Funs to see if what fixes we need to combine to make it work again. Once we merge it and master actually works again, we can rebase any open PR with current master and work from there. Regards, Remi On 24/09/15 14:00, "Ramanath Katru" <ramanath.ka...@citrix.com> wrote: >My vote is for the approach no.1 - to backout completely. Most of VR >functionalities are broken and are in a mess to say the least. It definitely >will take some time and effort from several folks to get it to a stable state. > >Ram Katru > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Raja Pullela [mailto:raja.pull...@citrix.com] >Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 2:06 PM >To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org >Subject: VR refactoring, concerns and a way out ? > >Hi, > > > >I understand a concern on the VR changes was raised earlier. My apologies to >restart this thread again. > > > >However, my last conversation with Jayapal, who has fixed/have been fixing lot >of VR issues, about the VR issues and he is pretty concerned about the >refactoring that has happened. I have had the same concern for sometime now >(VR issues have been on the list of issues to be looked into for at least 4+ >weeks) and wanted to see a good solution for this- with VR being very >fundamental to the system. > > > >Couple of solutions/proposals – > >1) Back out the VR changes – Pros: VR has been stable for some time and >it is working well. > >2) Continue to fix/stability VR changes - Concerns: is the unknowns, >what we will find out and how long this will take to stabilize the VR >functionality. > > > >Please chime in if you have any thoughts or concerns around this, > > > >best, > >Raja
