+1 for Gerrit.
From: Sanjay Tripathi [sanjay.tripa...@citrix.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 8:23 PM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: [ACS41] 4.1 branch created
+1 for Gerrit.
> -Original Message-
> From: S
+1 for Gerrit.
> -Original Message-
> From: Sateesh Chodapuneedi [mailto:sateesh.chodapune...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2013 11:43 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [ACS41] 4.1 branch created
>
> +1 for review p
On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 5:29 AM, David Nalley wrote:
> ...
>>
>>
>> I've had some folks express interesting in setting up Gerrit for code
>> reviews.
>> That said - it's not like we can't review code that is already
>> committed - we get commit
+1 for review process through Gerrit
> -Original Message-
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> Sent: 04 February 2013 00:20
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [ACS41] 4.1 branch created
>
> On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 2:2
+1 for gerrit.
Regards,
Devdeep
> -Original Message-
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2013 12:20 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [ACS41] 4.1 branch created
>
> On Sun, Feb 3, 20
+1 on gerrit. For example very grateful that mice put his changes on vm
snapshots on reviewboard.
I really disagree with code commit bring a privilege of committers.
--Alex
David Nalley wrote:
On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Chip Childers wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 2:23 AM, Marcus So
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 5:29 AM, David Nalley wrote:
...
>
>
> I've had some folks express interesting in setting up Gerrit for code reviews.
> That said - it's not like we can't review code that is already
> committed - we get commit mails after all. Gerrit just helps automate
> some of that.
Dav
On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Chip Childers wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 2:23 AM, Marcus Sorensen wrote:
>> Are you thinking there should be a regular moratorium or something similar
>> just before the cut, so that the quality of the features as a whole can be
>> evaluated, or are you just c
-Original Message-
From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2013 10:47 AM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [ACS41] 4.1 branch created
On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 2:03 AM, Hugo Trippaers
wrote:
> Heya all,
>
> I find it way too
On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 10:46 AM, Chip Childers
wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 2:03 AM, Hugo Trippaers
> wrote:
>> Heya all,
>>
>> I find it way too early to cut a 4.1 release branch. I now that this is what
>> we agreed to do, but the way we are going at it doesn't sit right with me.
>> The si
On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 2:37 AM, Hugo Trippaers
wrote:
> Hey Marcus,
>
> We do have another month or soto fix things. My main worry is the amount of
> things that we still have to fix. The current consensus is that we have a
> release manager who does the cherry picking of fixes from master to t
On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 2:23 AM, Marcus Sorensen wrote:
> Are you thinking there should be a regular moratorium or something similar
> just before the cut, so that the quality of the features as a whole can be
> evaluated, or are you just concerned that the last minute features didn't
> get proper
On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 2:03 AM, Hugo Trippaers
wrote:
> Heya all,
>
> I find it way too early to cut a 4.1 release branch. I now that this is what
> we agreed to do, but the way we are going at it doesn't sit right with me.
> The simple fact that we have some mayor code changes forced into maste
dapt the codebase as per new
> > design.
> >
> > Regards.
> >
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >> Hugo
> >>
> >>
> >> From: Marcus Sorensen [shadow...@gmail.com]
> >> Sen
rush.
>
> IMO 4.2 would be the actual version we would see radical changes,
> hoping we fix a lot of leftover tasks, adapt the codebase as per new
> design.
>
> Regards.
>
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Hugo
>>
>>
>> From: Marcus Sorensen
t the end in a rush.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Hugo
>
>
> From: Marcus Sorensen [shadow...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2013 8:23 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [ACS41] 4.1 branch created
>
> I
t;
> Cheers,
>
> Hugo
>
>
> From: Marcus Sorensen [shadow...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2013 8:23 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [ACS41] 4.1 branch created
>
> I understand the reservat
; So what do you guys think?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Hugo
>
>
>
> From: Chip Childers [chip.child...@sungard.com]
> Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2013 2:27 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [ACS41] 4.1 branch created
>
> On Feb 1, 2013, at 1
to deliver well tested and stable releases.
>
> Sorry for being such an ass about this, but we are all working very hard
> on getting this release out and i really want this to be the best release
> possible and not just a bunch of bolted-on features.
>
> So what do you guys think?
&
t do you guys think?
Cheers,
Hugo
From: Chip Childers [chip.child...@sungard.com]
Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2013 2:27 PM
To:
Subject: Re: [ACS41] 4.1 branch created
On Feb 1, 2013, at 11:42 PM, Mice Xia wrote:
> Does this mean features havent been merged into master will be postponed
On Feb 1, 2013, at 11:42 PM, Mice Xia wrote:
> Does this mean features havent been merged into master will be postponed to
> 4.2?
>
Yes. That was the idea with using a time-based release planning process.
> -Mice
>
> 2013/2/2 Alex Huang :
>> Kelven also mentioned he had to merge a few times b
Does this mean features havent been merged into master will be postponed to 4.2?
-Mice
2013/2/2 Alex Huang :
> Kelven also mentioned he had to merge a few times because code was being
> changed in master. It is supposed to be frozen until this message from Chip.
> Please respect the instructi
Kelven also mentioned he had to merge a few times because code was being
changed in master. It is supposed to be frozen until this message from Chip.
Please respect the instructions the release manager has given out. Master is
now open but 4.1 is now frozen. Please respect this even though y
23 matches
Mail list logo
