we have time could we add PR 1710 to the upcoming RC for 4.9.1.0. Its a
> small fix but its waiting for log time...
>
> Thanks again,
> Özhan
>
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 9:23 AM, John Burwell
> wrote:
>
>> All,
>>
>> I apologize for being relatively
All,
I apologize for being relatively radio silent. We have mage good progress
towards getting RCs out for 4.8.2.0, 4.9.1.0, and 4.10.0.0. On 31 October
2016, we 17 outstanding PRs to be merged. As of today (17 Nov 2016), we have 9
PRs to merge with pending one potential blocker/critical def
Chiradeep,
I am +1 to using a mirror list downloaded from downloads.cloudstack.apache.org
via https only (i.e. https://downloads.cloudstack.apache.org/mirror.lst). This
approach seems to be a common approach employed by other Apache projects that
need to provided downloadable assets. Therefor
KVM
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/977
>
>
> thanks !
>
>
> 在2016年11月01 11时23分, "John Burwell"写道:
>
> All,
>
> Since we have stabilized the smoke tests, we have made good progress merging
> PRs. Currently, the following open P
All,
Since we have stabilized the smoke tests, we have made good progress merging
PRs. Currently, the following open PRs are being targeted for these releases:
* 4.10.0.0 (+ all 4.8.2.0 and 4.9.1.0 PRs)
* 1542
* 1545
* 1577
All,
I will be out 18-25 Oct 2016 for ankle surgery. Murali Reddy will reviewing,
testing, and merging PRs until I return.
Thanks,
-John
john.burw...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
t; 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
> w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_
>
> On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 9:53 AM, John Burwell
> wrote:
>
>> All,
>>
>> Thank you Ilya and Haijao for your words of encouragement. In addition to
>> the efforts of
Congratulations, Syed.
Thanks,
-John
>
john.burw...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
On Oct 7, 2016, at 6:30 AM, Paul Angus wrote:
>
> Congrats Syed.!
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Paul Angus
>
> paul.an...@shapeblue.com
> w
t;
> John and Team
>
> Thanks for amazing work and contributing back.
>
> Regards,
> ilya
>
> On 10/3/16 9:48 PM, John Burwell wrote:
>> All,
>>
>> A quick update on our progress to pass all smoke tests aka super green. We
>> have reduced the fail
?pageId=65873020
[2]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9528
[3]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9529
>
john.burw...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
On Sep 30, 2016, at 2:40 AM, John Burw
at goes
> in.
>
> Thanks for all the hard work team. :)
>
> *Will STEVENS*
> Lead Developer
>
> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
> w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_
>
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 2:10 AM, John Bur
; 4.8.2 and I just wanted to get it released before you guys modified the
>> branch so the release branching didn't get messed up.
>>
>> *Will STEVENS*
>> Lead Developer
>>
>> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
>> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|*
Will,
Have we had an official 4.8.1 release?
Thanks,
-John
>
john.burw...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
On Aug 15, 2016, at 11:48 AM, Will Stevens wrote:
>
> Thanks Milamber. I will add my own vote.
>
> *Will STEVENS*
All,
As part of the effort to remove the requirement for JSPs and streamline the
development process, Milamber has raised the option of replacing the
message*.properties files with a JSON key/value format [1]. As I understand
it, Transifex supports this file format, and it appears that it woul
All,
Per our release schedule [1], the 4.8, 4.9, and master branches are frozen for
testing. There are some straggling PRs that Rajani and I are working to merge.
Is it acceptable to everyone that for the next two (2) weeks, all PRs require
not only 2 LGTMs, but approval by Rajani or I to be
://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/%5BPROPOSAL%5D+2016-2017+Release+Cycle+and+Calendar
>
john.burw...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
On Sep 19, 2016, at 1:18 AM, John Burwell wrote:
>
> All,
>
> The 4.8.
All,
Reviving this thread as it would be a Good Thing(tm) to get Spring 4 merged for
4.10.0.0. Based on Rohit’s original question, it appears that the only issue
is F5 on Java8 (not on Java7). Is there someone available with F5 knowledge
who can investigate it? If not, would it be acceptable
All,
The 4.8.2.0 and 4.9.1.0 releases have taken more time than expected to
finalize. Per our original schedule [1], 4.9.2.0 and 4.10.0.0 were scheduled
to freeze yesterday (18 September 2016). I propose the following schedule and
end-of-life (EOL) changes:
* 4.8.2.0 is still open, but 4
Pierre-Luc,
It is possible to have the new Jenkins authenticate against he ASF LDAP? Since
the ASF LDAP reflects who is a committer, we wouldn’t have to manage multiple
authentication repositories.
Thanks,
-John
>
john.burw...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden,
Will,
Typo. “application model” was meant to be “appliance model”.
Thanks,
-John
>
john.burw...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
On Sep 12, 2016, at 4:35 PM, John Burwell wrote:
>
> Will,
>
> I agree
Will,
I agree that we need to replace the VR, but I am not convinced that continuing
with the notion of a monolithic application model is a best direction. The
problem with the current model is that it lacks flexibility. Some users only
need to deploy DHCP and DNS across a zone where others n
Sergey,
We are working on a full automated build pipeline that will test against a wide
range of configurations. Ideally, the pipeline will work as follows:
1. PR is submitted -> the PR is built, unit tested, and run through static
analysis. Smoke tests are run on a matrix of configurati
All,
There appears to be some confusion around who can merge a PR and when it should
occur. Section 2.3 of bylaws [1] are very clear, any committer may commit code
to any branch. As a community, we have agreed that non-security contributions
should be submitted as a PR, and that a PR must mee
Kris,
Looking at the history of the PR, there appears to be one LGTM for testing the
PR scope. Given the size of the change, it seems appropriate to run a
regression test. However, there are no results indicating a regression test
has been run.
I also reviewed the code and left comments to m
pache/cloudstack/pull/1665
>
john.burw...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
On Aug 28, 2016, at 11:14 PM, John Burwell wrote:
>
> All,
>
> I apologize for being behind getting the 4.8.2.0 and 4.9.1.0 RCs out. A
All,
I apologize for being behind getting the 4.8.2.0 and 4.9.1.0 RCs out. A small
part of it was due to the RC release dates falling the weekend after being on
vacation, and a large part of it is due to rookie mistakes as a first time RM.
Hopefully, the lessons learned will keep things on-ti
>>
>
> Well, yes. But I don't know *what* might break on 12.04. I wrote the PR in
> May and there must have been a reason for that.
>
> Feel free to modify the PR and not bump those versions. Packages might work
> or not, not completely sure.
>
> Wido
All,
PR 1647 [1] proposes dropping support for Ubuntu 12.04 from 4.9.2.0+. The
primary motivation for its removal is that the age of its libvirt and qemu
versions greatly complicate maintenance of the KVM integration. However,
Ubuntu 12.04 will be supported until April 2017 [2]. What would be
All,
Per our release schedule [1], the 4.8 and 4.9 branches enter a soft freeze for
testing for the 4.8.2.0 and 4.9.1.0 testing effective 14 August 2016 @
GMT. During this period, only defects that stabilize changes since the
previous release should be merged into these release branches.
All,
I will be out on vacation 15-19 August 2016. I will try to keep an eye on dev@
and PRs, but my responses may lag as I will only be checking mail periodically.
Thanks,
-John
john.burw...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
Matthew,
Thank you for the report. I have forwarded this report to security@ for
further investigation.
Thanks,
-John
>
john.burw...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
On Aug 11, 2016, at 8:14 AM, Matthew Smart wrote:
>
>
more people to merge PRs in addition to
>> RMs.
>>
>> How do we select these additional volunteers?
>> Any committer can just come forward and declare(in a mail to dev@) that he
>> read the release principles[1] and would like to volunteer to commit.
>>
>> [1]
>> ht
Will,
My understanding of the release principles is that all changes must have a PR
with the exception of CVE fixes. Since we must accept CVE fixes in private,
the 2 LGTM rule is applied on the security@ mailing list and on private JIRA
security ticket. I would also say that the release commi
rstandable that they may not be able to volunteer
>>>> enough time and effort to get the PRs sorted.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Over past months this and similar practices have killed our commit and
>>>> development momentum, and I think it's not a healthy
t; by John Burwell)
>> * Development (master open to features and defect fixes): 1 August 2016 -
>> 11 September 2016
>> * Testing: 12 - 18 September 2016
>> * RC Voting: 19 - 25 September 2016
>> * Release: 26 September 2016
>>
>> master is open for 4.10.0.
te.com/
> On August 2, 2016 at 2:33 AM, John Burwell
> (john.burw...@shapeblue.com) wrote:Wido,
>
> As proposed, LTS will be a branch of 4.9.0 with a six (6) week
> period of additional testing (i.e. soak/endurance, scalability,
> and more extensive plugin testing). Therefore, LTS rele
All,
First, thank you to Will for taking on 4.9 and getting it out the door. I have
updated the proposed release schedule [1] to reflect the release of 4.9.0 on 1
August 2016. Please review the release schedule. If you have questions or
issues, please let me know. I hope we can come to a co
in the original proposal. If/when we gain consensus on this change, I
will adjust the schedule.
Thanks,
-John
From: Wido den Hollander
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2016 4:15:36 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; John Burwell
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Early LTS Initial
All,
I vote +1 (binding). We have tested 4.9.0 RC2 in the following environments:
• CentOS 6.8 management server + CentOS 6.8 KVM Hosts using NFS primary
and secondary storage (would allow us to verify/fix the documented libvirt/qemu
versions)
• CentOS 6.8 management server + v
Will,
I am inquiring as to the status of 4.9.0 RC2. Are there issues we can help
resolve in order to get it out? If not, do you have an ETA on when it will be
cut?
Thanks,
-John
john.burw...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
All,
Since LTS introduces a new release stream, I would like to propose that we cut
the first LTS quickly to verify that various aspects of the release cycle and
version number dependent components will work properly with the new release
naming scheme. It will also allow us to flesh out distri
Paul,
Is this condition a regression in previous behavior?
Thanks,
-John
>
john.burw...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
On Jul 10, 2016, at 8:06 AM, Paul Angus wrote:
>
> Guys,
>
> Is it not possible to add the additiona
not able to find time to work on 4.9 release, maybe someone else
>> can takeover and help with the 4.9 release by 15th July (at least get some
>> RCs up for testing and voting)? LTS can be 4.9.1 etc.
>>
>>
>> Regards.
>>
>>
All,
Following up on a our discussions about LTS [1], post 4.9 releases [2], and
5.0.0/6.0.0 [3], I have assembled a release plan for the next 18-20 months in
the wiki [4]. My original proposal assumed by that 4.9 would be released by 1
July. I have adjusted the timelines assuming that we wil
SUK
@shapeblue
On Jun 20, 2016, at 4:31 PM, John Burwell wrote:
>
> All,
>
> I am working to coordinate some testing at ShapeBlue. I send an update as
> soon as I have the list of environment and tests we plan to run.
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
&g
;>>
>>> echo "Running tests with required_hardware=false"
>>> nosetests --with-marvin --marvin-config=${marvinCfg} -s -a
>>> tags=advanced,required_hardware=false \
>>> smoke/test_routers.py \
>>> smoke/test_network_acl.py \
>>> smoke/test_
All,
It is a bit lo-fi, but if you are testing master in preparation for the 4.9 RC,
could you please share information about the configurations you testing (e.g.
hypervisors, storage backends, network configurations, etc)? Any test results
could also be helpful. The hope is to reduce duplica
wrote:
I currently do not have a good mechanism for people to specify what they have
tested. I am open to ideas if you have some.
On Jun 17, 2016 2:46 PM, "John Burwell"
mailto:john.burw...@shapeblue.com>> wrote:
Will,
Do you know which hypervisors, storage plugins, and net
TEVENS
Lead Developer
CloudOps | Cloud Solutions Experts
420 rue Guy | Montreal | Quebec | H3J 1S6
w cloudops.com<http://cloudops.com/> | tw @CloudOps_
On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 2:20 PM, John Burwell
mailto:john.burw...@shapeblue.com>> wrote:
Will,
Is there any assistance the communit
esting is being done and I am waiting on results.
Will STEVENS
Lead Developer
CloudOps | Cloud Solutions Experts
420 rue Guy | Montreal | Quebec | H3J 1S6
w cloudops.com<http://cloudops.com/> | tw @CloudOps_
On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 1:19 PM, John Burwell
mailto:john.burw...@shapeblue.com&
All,
I like the idea of a new set of CNAMEs for these services, but I am -1 on the
idea of these apachecloudstack.net CNAMEs. Like cloudstack.org, I think that
apachecloudstack.[org|net] should point to cloudstack.apache.org. Instead, I
suggest that we create them as part of the canonical na
All,
What is the status of the 4.9.0 release? Looking at the 4.9.0 JIRA [1], there
are 23 open tickets. Do these tickets represent the outstanding work before a
RC can be cut? If not, what other tasks remain?
Thanks,
-John
[1]:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9417?jql=proj
Welcome to the community, Sanket.
>
john.burw...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
On Jun 17, 2016, at 6:09 AM, Sanket Thite wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> I would like to introduce myself to the community.
>
> I am Sanket Thite and ha
API weren't mentioned in this thread I think they should.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 1:53 AM, ilya
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I agree and support John's comments below.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> ilya
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 1:53 AM, ilya
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I agree and support John's comments below.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> ilya
>>>
>>> On 6/14/16 2:44 PM, John Burwell wrote:
>>>> All,
>>>>
Mike,
Anyone can submit a PR against any branch. If they can get 2 LGTMs for it, it
will be merged. After that, you could create a new 4.6 RC, and open a vote for
it. While there is nothing procedurally that prevents someone from following
this process, it is unlikely that the release vote w
ticularly, no. However, this subject is hard to make small. :(
>
>> Op 15 juni 2016 om 2:39 schreef John Burwell :
>>
>>
>> All,
>>
>> We have been discussing whether or not the next release would introduce the
>> need to increment the major revisio
All,
We have been discussing whether or not the next release would introduce the
need to increment the major revision number from 4 to 5 (i.e. become 5.0.0).
While I think we are very close to the time to have a 5.0.0 release, I don’t
think the next release will introduce any backwards compati
All,
Completely agree with Daan. Per semantic versioning, a major revision increase
must introduce a backwards incompatible change in the public API, removal of
one of more supported devices, reduction in the list of supported
distributions. I agree that when we require Java8+, drop Ubuntu 12
All,
Has anyone had a chance to try XenServer 7 since it’s release? If so, does it
work? If not, how broken is it? My guess would be in agreement with the
general consensus that a change from CentOS 5 to 7 would not only be breaking,
but significant.
Thanks,
-John
>
john.burw...@shapeblue
016, at 10:47 AM, Ron Wheeler
wrote:
>
> That is correct from my reading of the Apache page as well.
> I think that your definition of committer and contributor is identical to
> Apache's.
>
>
> Ron
>
> On 09/06/2016 3:57 PM, John Burwell wrote:
>> All,
All,
I believe Pierre-Luc’s explanation is correct, and that we may have slightly
different definitions of contributor and committer. Generally, we define a
contributor, we are referring to anyone (committer, PMC member, any person in
the world) who contributes code, documentation, etc to the
AM, John Burwell wrote:
>
> All,
>
> Over the course of the last 6-8 months, we have attempted to release monthly.
> We successfully delivered 4.6, 4,7, and 4,8 using this model. We also
> established a strong set of CM and review principles to improve the quality
&
All,
Over the course of the last 6-8 months, we have attempted to release monthly.
We successfully delivered 4.6, 4,7, and 4,8 using this model. We also
established a strong set of CM and review principles to improve the quality of
releases [1]. To support users that are unable to upgrade on
All,
I am also willing to be an RM post 4.9, as well as, for LTS. I will be able to
serve as an RM through at least the end of 2016.
To kickoff the planning process, I have started a release cycle discussion on
the list to pin down the schedule for both regular and LTS releases.
Thanks,
-John
Will,
Rohit has built a new systemvm template that includes strongswan and quagga.
He can point you to images, as well as, help with understanding the
build/release process.
Thanks,
-John
>
Regards,
John Burwell
john.burw...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Gar
Will,
1371 includes new Marvin test cases to verify the operation of OSPF. Bobby
Stoyanov will be running these tests, as well as, manual rating of the UI
features added to support it.
Thanks,
-John
>
Regards,
John Burwell
john.burw...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Pl
but within 36-48 hangs or abends. Therefore, the first step to getting a
stable build on JDK8 is to ensure that all our dependencies support it.
Thanks,
-John
[1]: https://spring.io/blog/2013/05/21/spring-framework-4-0-m1-3-2-3-available/
>
Regards,
John Burwell
john.burw...@shape
Ron,
Upon upgrade, we will start using features and runtime classes/methods
introduced with Java8. Therefore, it will become mandatory upgrade from Java7
to Java8 when adopting the release with these changes.
Thanks,
-John
>
Regards,
John Burwell
john.burw...@shapeblue.
allow a
particular distribution’s failure to update their to supported JDK place our
user community at risk.
Thanks,
-John
[1]: https://launchpad.net/~webupd8team/+archive/ubuntu/java
[2]: http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html
>
Regards,
John Burwell
john.b
. Additionally, my hope is that
some advance organization and coordination will allow people to participate
virtually.
Thanks,
-John
>
Regards,
John Burwell
john.burw...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
On May 5, 2016, at 1
to
participate.
Thanks,
-John
[1]:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/14U0E1YpgZvsBc88SHVojo-XzOLAKs-WFEkMxXlrAl_o/edit#gid=0
[2]: https://support.google.com/hangouts/answer/3111943?hl=en
Regards,
John Burwell
john.burw...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden
Congrats Rafael.
>
Regards,
John Burwell
john.burw...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
On May 2, 2016, at 9:21 AM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
>
> Congrats Rafael.
>
> Regards,
> Rohit Yadav
>
>
>
Congrats, Simon.
>
Regards,
John Burwell
john.burw...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
On May 2, 2016, at 9:21 AM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
>
> Congrats Simon.
>
> Regards,
> Rohit Yadav
>
>
>
rds,
John Burwell
john.burw...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
On Apr 20, 2016, at 6:11 AM, John Burwell wrote:
>
> Erik,
>
> Good question about the mechanics. I agree that removal of accounts would
> not be correct.
Daan,
I disagree with automatically placing someone in emeritus status. I think it
is very important that some explicitly requests the status.
Thanks,
-John
>
Regards,
John Burwell
john.burw...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4H
manage it. I will send
an email to infra asking them how it is managed for other projects and report
back to dev@.
Thanks,
-John
>
Regards,
John Burwell
john.burw...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
On Apr 20, 2016, at 4:01
tp://cocoon.apache.org/
[4]:
http://code.metager.de/source/xref/apache/cocoon/commons/bylaws/bylaws.txt#14
Regards,
John Burwell
john.burw...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
Welcome to the community, Rashimi.
>
Regards,
John Burwell
john.burw...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
On Apr 8, 2016, at 1:03 PM, Ahmad Emneina wrote:
>
> Welcome Rashmi, look forward to seeing great cont
+1 (binding)
>
[ShapeBlue]<http://www.shapeblue.com>
John Burwell
ShapeBlue
d: +44 (20) 3603 0542 | s: +1 (571) 403-2411
e: john.burw...@shapeblue.com | t:
<mailto:john.burw...@shapeblue.com%20|%20t:> | w:
www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblu
ce/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=61311655
>
[ShapeBlue]<http://www.shapeblue.com>
John Burwell
ShapeBlue
d: +44 (20) 3603 0542 | s: +1 (571) 403-2411
e: john.burw...@shapeblue.com | t:
<mailto:john.burw...@shapeblue.com%20|%20t:> | w:
www.shapeblue.com<ht
/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=61311655
>
[ShapeBlue]<http://www.shapeblue.com>
John Burwell
ShapeBlue
d: +44 (20) 3603 0542 | s: +1 (571) 403-2411
e: john.burw...@shapeblue.com | t:
<mailto:john.burw...@shapeblue.com%20|%20t:> | w:
www.sha
,
-John
>
[ShapeBlue]<http://www.shapeblue.com>
John Burwell
ShapeBlue
d: +44 (20) 3603 0542 | s: +1 (571) 403-2411
e: john.burw...@shapeblue.com | t:
<mailto:john.burw...@shapeblue.com%20|%20t:> | w:
www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com>
a:
overlapping LTS release is to provide
users that require longer update cycles (e.g. 18 months) a bridge to upgrade.
Thanks,
-John
>
[ShapeBlue]<http://www.shapeblue.com>
John Burwell
ShapeBlue
d: +44 (20) 3603 0542 | s: +1 (571) 403-2411
e: john.burw...@shapeblu
Wido,
Curious if you have been able to make any progress on this work. Have you been
able to move it forward? If not, what kind of help would you need?
Thanks,
-John
>
[ShapeBlue]<http://www.shapeblue.com>
John Burwell
ShapeBlue
d: +44 (20) 3603 0542 | s: +1 (571) 403-
All,
Based on the feedback from Ilya, Erik, and Daan, I have updated my original LTS
proposal to clarify that LTS releases are official project deliverables, commit
traceability across branches, and RM approval of PRs:
## START ##
Motivation
==
The current monthly release cycle addres
Congrats and welcome, Boris.
>
[ShapeBlue]<http://www.shapeblue.com>
John Burwell
ShapeBlue
d: +44 (20) 3603 0542 | s: +1 (571) 403-2411
e: john.burw...@shapeblue.com | t:
<mailto:john.burw...@shapeblue.com%20|%20t:> | w:
www.shapeblue.com<http:/
passive
sessions — active collaboration and coding.
Thanks,
-John
>
[ShapeBlue]<http://www.shapeblue.com>
John Burwell
ShapeBlue
d: +44 (20) 3603 0542 | s: +1 (571) 403-2411
e: john.burw...@shapeblue.com | t:
<mailto:john.burw...@shapeblue.com%20|%20t:&g
Sebastian,
Thank you for your years of dedication and leadership. Best of luck with the
new company — may many unicorns be in your future.
Thanks,
-John
>
[ShapeBlue]<http://www.shapeblue.com>
John Burwell
ShapeBlue
d: +44 (20) 3603 0542 | s: +1 (571) 403-2411
e:
— further helping me
prioritize notifications.
Thanks,
-John
>
[ShapeBlue]<http://www.shapeblue.com>
John Burwell
ShapeBlue
d: +44 (20) 3603 0542 | s: +1 (571) 403-2411
e: john.burw...@shapeblue.com | t:
<mailto:john.burw...@shapeblue.com%20|%20t:&g
believe that the tighter
constraints on the defects that are allowed to be backported, a clearly defined
policy about the LTS release cycle schedule, and monthly releases will allow us
to avoid the mistakes of the past.
Thanks,
-John
>
[ShapeBlue]<http://www.shapeblue.com>
Joh
les
>
> Not sure how to continue from here, except that I think we need to remove
> all null returns where objects are expected.
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 1:56 PM, John Burwell
> wrote:
>
>> Daan,
>>
>> I completely agree that returning null is bad
merge pattern
to ensure that LTS does not violate or impede the flow of defect fixes on
master and maintained monthly releases.
Thanks,
-John
>
[ShapeBlue]<http://www.shapeblue.com>
John Burwell
ShapeBlue
d: +44 (20) 3603 0542 | s: +1 (571) 403-2411
e: john.burw...@shap
de of LTS. Since this is more around
> long term bug/security fix - i'd think - the testing will be minimal, to
> the scope that fix applies - which will speed up the release process in
> general. What are your thoughts on this?
>
>
> Thanks
> ilya
>
>
>
>
&
examples, it can be unit tested to ensure the missing case behaves
as expected.
Thanks,
-John
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Null_Object_pattern
[2]: https://gist.github.com/jburwell/f5162ad2d2de32c842b3
>
[ShapeBlue]<http://www.shapeblue.com>
John Burwell
ShapeBlue
d: +44
yield releases that meet the needs of users requiring release
stability without adversely affecting the velocity of the monthly release cycle.
Thanks,
-John
[1]: http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html
[ShapeBlue]<http://www.shapeblue.com>
John Burwell
ShapeBlue
d: +
most, if not
all, of the points discussed on this thread. Hopefully, we will quickly gain
consensus on an LTS release cycle, and begin doing the work necessary to
deliver high quality LTS releases.
Thanks,
-John
>
[ShapeBlue]<http://www.shapeblue.com>
John Burwell
ShapeBlue
d:
All,
I completely agree with Wido that the notion of the ACS version (e.g. 4.6.0,
4.6.1, 4.7.0, etc) should be a purely logical concept. It points to particular
git hash, a version of the database schema, etc. I also agree that supporting
downgrade is a fools errand as many database schema ch
additional gaps between JIRA and Github Issues
functionality as Github Issues is an extremely simplistic ticking system. For
these reasons, I am -1 on moving to Github Issues.
Thanks,
-John
>
[ShapeBlue]<http://www.shapeblue.com>
John Burwell
ShapeBlue
d: +44 (20) 3603 0542 | s: +1
control plane. I think it would
be best to decompose the effort into four parts — Host Power Management, HA
Resource Management Service, KVM Host HA Provider, and management server
clustering improvements.
Thoughts?
-John
[1]: https://github.com/shevek/ipmi4j
[ShapeBlue]<http://www.shapeblu
1 - 100 of 447 matches
Mail list logo
