Re: [PROPOSAL] drop old upgrade code

d with proper documentation >> and an advanced notification in some prior releases. This is similar to the >> way some API is deprecated and then eventually removed. >> >> -Koushik >> >> -Original Message- >> From: Daan Hoogland [

RE: [PROPOSAL] drop old upgrade code

n in some prior releases. This is similar to the > way some API is deprecated and then eventually removed. > > -Koushik > > -Original Message- > From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, 20 July 2015 17:19 > To: dev &g

RE: [PROPOSAL] drop old upgrade code

similar to the way some API is deprecated and then eventually removed. -Koushik -Original Message- From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, 20 July 2015 17:19 To: dev Subject: [PROPOSAL] drop old upgrade code LS, In coverity the only remaining high impact

Re: [PROPOSAL] drop old upgrade code

irst and then go to a ACS release. Wido > Regards, > Somesh > > -Original Message- > From: Erik Weber [mailto:terbol...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 2:30 PM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] drop old upgrade code > >

RE: [PROPOSAL] drop old upgrade code

ed, 2.x and 3.x users can still upgrade to 4.6+ using a multi-step approach (upgrading to 4.3/4.5 first). Regards, Somesh -Original Message- From: Erik Weber [mailto:terbol...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 2:30 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] drop old up

RE: [PROPOSAL] drop old upgrade code

establish a standard upgrade policy. -Original Message- From: John Burwell [mailto:john.burw...@shapeblue.com] Sent: 20 July 2015 09:41 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] drop old upgrade code Daan, While I see the desire to remove outstanding scan issues, doing it at the

Re: [PROPOSAL] drop old upgrade code

As a user, I'd say +1. I understand the concerns, but as long as there is a workaround I'm fine with it. Would be great though if the upgrade scripts abort if it notices an upgrade from an unsupported versions. Erik Den mandag 20. juli 2015 skrev Daan Hoogland følgende: > LS, > > In coverity

Re: [PROPOSAL] drop old upgrade code

Daan, While I see the desire to remove outstanding scan issues, doing it at the expense of a feature required by users is not acceptable to me. My first question is how many users are still running pre-4.x versions? In its current state, the commit message lacks an explanation of the reasonin

Re: [PROPOSAL] drop old upgrade code

-1 I disagree and shared some of the reasons on the PR. We may need to ask on users@ to see if there are any users on 2.x or 3.x to find if there are any users on these old versions which should be supported because we can decide to remove 2.x/3.x upgrade paths. On 20-Jul-2015, at 5:59 pm, Wido

Re: [PROPOSAL] drop old upgrade code

in anticipation of loads of +1's I made a new PR (at [2]) On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Wido den Hollander wrote: > > > On 20-07-15 13:48, Daan Hoogland wrote: >> LS, >> >> In coverity the only remaining high impact issues are concerned with >> upgrade code. Some of it is in 4.3 and 4.5 code b

Re: [PROPOSAL] drop old upgrade code

On 20-07-15 13:48, Daan Hoogland wrote: > LS, > > In coverity the only remaining high impact issues are concerned with > upgrade code. Some of it is in 4.3 and 4.5 code but most in pre-4 > upgrades. > > I addressed the file Upgrade218to22.java in a PR [1] and I move that > we don't pull it but

[PROPOSAL] drop old upgrade code

LS, In coverity the only remaining high impact issues are concerned with upgrade code. Some of it is in 4.3 and 4.5 code but most in pre-4 upgrades. I addressed the file Upgrade218to22.java in a PR [1] and I move that we don't pull it but instead drop the file altogether together with all upgrade