r.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [ASFCS42] Proposed schedule for our next release
>
> Joe thanks for bringing this up and noting that the subject may not have got
> everyone's attention. I will start a separate thread on 4 month v/s 6 month
>
> Animesh
>
> > -Original Mes
9 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [ASFCS42] Proposed schedule for our next release
>
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013, at 04:50 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
> > Based on the community discussions of having 4 month cadence I am
> > pro
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013, at 04:50 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
> Based on the community discussions of having 4 month cadence I am
> proposing the following schedule:
We seem to have gone off the rails into a 4-month vs. 6-month
discussion. It's been a week since the original schedule discussion
sta
> -Original Message-
> From: David Nalley [mailto:da...@gnsa.us]
> Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2013 6:41 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [ASFCS42] Proposed schedule for our next release
>
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 6:26 PM, Will Chan wrote:
&g
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 10:16:35AM +, Murali Reddy wrote:
>
> Pardon my ignorance of project management, but it appears to me we are
> talking of managing a release after half way through the cycle. May be
> this is orthogonal discussion, but how about taking approach of planning a
> release e
So while I will agree that in person communication is faster, and has
higher throughput, it's not without problems for decision making for
this community.
First it dramatically raises the barrier to participation. This is
supposed to be a meritocracy. But shifting decisions, especially
important d
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 08:40:48AM -0700, Min Chen wrote:
> I like this idea too, this will be a much better channel for community to
> understand features to be planned. +1 to this.
>
> -min
>
> On 4/19/13 7:02 AM, "Prasanna Santhanam" wrote:
>
> >On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 10:16:35AM +, Mura
I like this idea too, this will be a much better channel for community to
understand features to be planned. +1 to this.
-min
On 4/19/13 7:02 AM, "Prasanna Santhanam" wrote:
>On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 10:16:35AM +, Murali Reddy wrote:
>>
>> Pardon my ignorance of project management, but it a
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 10:16:35AM +, Murali Reddy wrote:
>
> Pardon my ignorance of project management, but it appears to me we are
> talking of managing a release after half way through the cycle. May be
> this is orthogonal discussion, but how about taking approach of planning a
> release e
ll Chan
>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> -Original Message-
>>>>>> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
>>>>>> Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 7:22 AM
>>>>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>&
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 11:29:46PM -0400, David Nalley wrote:
> > I disagree. You might take a hit in the short term as people get
> > acclimated, but I've accelerated multiple projects' output by being
> > exceptionally focused on automated quality checks (unit, integration,
> > regression, etc...
;>>
>>>> On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 6:26 PM, Will Chan wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> -Original Message-
>>>>>> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
>>>>>> Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 7:22 AM
>>
t;
>>>>> -Original Message-
>>>>> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
>>>>> Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 7:22 AM
>>>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>>>>> Cc: cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org
>>&g
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013, at 08:41 PM, David Nalley wrote:
> Having seen the point releases twice now, which still need upgrade
> testing, release notes, etc I don't get the feeling that the
> 'overhread' referred to above is the problem. Joe may disagree with
> me.
I do, to a degree.
- Point release
ip.child...@sungard.com]
>>> > Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 7:22 AM
>>> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>>> > Cc: cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org
>>> > Subject: Re: [ASFCS42] Proposed schedule for our next release
>>> >
>>> >
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> > Cc: cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org
>> > Subject: Re: [ASFCS42] Proposed schedule for our next release
>> >
>> > On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 02:50:02PM -0700, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
>> > >
>> > > I want t
t; > Subject: Re: [ASFCS42] Proposed schedule for our next release
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 02:50:02PM -0700, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
> > >
> > > I want to call out my concern on technical debt we have accumulated so
> > far.
> > >
> >
> -Original Message-
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 7:22 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Cc: cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [ASFCS42] Proposed schedule for our next release
>
> On Th
>
> >
> > I want to call out my concern on technical debt we have accumulated so far.
> >
> > I did an analysis on JIRA bugs yesterday night PST on "Affects
> > Version = 4.1" and created since Dec 2012
> >
> > Total records : 429
> > Resolution Type (Invalid, Duplicate, Cannot reproduce etc.)
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 02:50:02PM -0700, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
> Based on the community discussions of having 4 month cadence I am proposing
> the following schedule:
>
> =
> 4.2 detailed schedule proposal:
> =
>
>
> 2013-05-31
>
> > >
> > >
> > > On Apr 11, 2013, at 10:33 PM, "Marcus Sorensen"
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > One thing I'd like to point out, and perhaps its merely
> > > > subjective, but it seemed like from initial 4.1 feature freeze to
> > > > a week or two before the rc was supposed to be cut there was
> >
> > On Apr 11, 2013, at 10:33 PM, "Marcus Sorensen"
> > wrote:
> >
> > > One thing I'd like to point out, and perhaps its merely subjective,
> > > but it seemed like from initial 4.1 feature freeze to a week or two
> > > before the rc was supposed to be cut there wasn't much action on bug
> >
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 7:05 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi <
animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> > On Apr 11, 2013, at 10:33 PM, "Marcus Sorensen"
> > wrote:
> >
> > > One thing I'd like to point out, and perhaps its merely subjective,
> > > but it seemed like from initial 4.1 featur
>
>
>
> On Apr 11, 2013, at 10:33 PM, "Marcus Sorensen"
> wrote:
>
> > One thing I'd like to point out, and perhaps its merely subjective,
> > but it seemed like from initial 4.1 feature freeze to a week or two
> > before the rc was supposed to be cut there wasn't much action on bug
> > fixi
On Apr 11, 2013, at 10:33 PM, "Marcus Sorensen" wrote:
> One thing I'd like to point out, and perhaps its merely subjective, but it
> seemed like from initial 4.1 feature freeze to a week or two before the rc
> was supposed to be cut there wasn't much action on bug fixing. It wasn't
> until t
One thing I'd like to point out, and perhaps its merely subjective, but it
seemed like from initial 4.1 feature freeze to a week or two before the rc
was supposed to be cut there wasn't much action on bug fixing. It wasn't
until the deadlines started becoming imminent that people came back to work
> -Original Message-
> From: David Nalley [mailto:da...@gnsa.us]
> Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 10:11 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [ASFCS42] Proposed schedule for our next release
>
> >
> > Looking at that we fixed 217 bugs in rou
>
> Looking at that we fixed 217 bugs in roughly 2 months during 4.1 cycle,
> fixing the backlog of bug will probably take us 2 months. Should we extend
> the 4.2 test cycle by 2 months [Original Schedule: 6/1 - 7/22, Extended
> Schedule: 6/1-9/22] to reduce the technical debt significantly?
Based on the community discussions of having 4 month cadence I am proposing the
following schedule:
=
4.2 detailed schedule proposal:
=
2013-05-31
Feature Freeze
All new feature need to have been merged into master by this date.
29 matches
Mail list logo
