Re: 4.1 release manager

2013-05-30 Thread Chip Childers
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 05:35:36PM +, Musayev, Ilya wrote: > Thanks Chip. > > Officially accepted, I'm going to create git-monitor scripts to email me of > daily git changes and see if they are applicable to 4.1.x. > > I'll share the script once I have it working, perhaps it can be used by o

RE: 4.1 release manager

2013-05-30 Thread Musayev, Ilya
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] > Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 1:30 PM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: 4.1 release manager > > On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 04:18:51PM +, Musayev, Ilya wrote: > > I will tentatively say yes - pending my disc

Re: 4.1 release manager

2013-05-30 Thread Chip Childers
On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 04:18:51PM +, Musayev, Ilya wrote: > I will tentatively say yes - pending my discussion with Chip on Thursday on > the process. > > Regards > ilya Ilya and I spoke. There are a couple of things that *we* should probably document about the role / process within our co

Re: 4.1 release manager

2013-05-28 Thread Chip Childers
On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 04:18:51PM +, Musayev, Ilya wrote: > I will tentatively say yes - pending my discussion with Chip on Thursday on > the process. Outback - if you want to help, that's still a possibility (see my note about how you could help). Ilya has the commit-bit, so he can be the

RE: 4.1 release manager

2013-05-28 Thread Musayev, Ilya
I will tentatively say yes - pending my discussion with Chip on Thursday on the process. Regards ilya > -Original Message- > From: Joe Brockmeier [mailto:j...@zonker.net] > Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 9:40 AM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: 4.1 release mana

Re: 4.1 release manager

2013-05-28 Thread Joe Brockmeier
On Sat, May 25, 2013, at 09:52 AM, Outback Dingo wrote: > In my opinion, an RM should have some autonomy in management. Is there some instance you've noticed the release manager not having sufficient autonomy? I'd be curious to know where the RM needs more autonomy than we've had so far. Best,

Re: 4.1 release manager

2013-05-26 Thread Outback Dingo
On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Chip Childers wrote: > On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 10:52:34AM -0400, Outback Dingo wrote: > > On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Chip Childers > > wrote: > > > > > On May 25, 2013, at 10:16 AM, Sebastien Goasguen > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On May 25, 2013, at 10:0

Re: 4.1 release manager

2013-05-26 Thread Chip Childers
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 10:52:34AM -0400, Outback Dingo wrote: > On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Chip Childers > wrote: > > > On May 25, 2013, at 10:16 AM, Sebastien Goasguen wrote: > > > > > > > > On May 25, 2013, at 10:08 AM, Outback Dingo > > wrote: > > > > > >> On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 10:0

Re: 4.1 release manager

2013-05-25 Thread Outback Dingo
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Chip Childers wrote: > On May 25, 2013, at 10:16 AM, Sebastien Goasguen wrote: > > > > > On May 25, 2013, at 10:08 AM, Outback Dingo > wrote: > > > >> On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Sebastien Goasguen >wrote: > >> > >>> Hi folks, > >>> > >>> Some time back I

Re: 4.1 release manager

2013-05-25 Thread Chip Childers
On May 25, 2013, at 10:16 AM, Sebastien Goasguen wrote: > > On May 25, 2013, at 10:08 AM, Outback Dingo wrote: > >> On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Sebastien Goasguen wrote: >> >>> Hi folks, >>> >>> Some time back I offered to be RM for 4.1.x , since then I took on the >>> GSoC effort and won'

Re: 4.1 release manager

2013-05-25 Thread Sebastien Goasguen
On May 25, 2013, at 10:08 AM, Outback Dingo wrote: > On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Sebastien Goasguen wrote: > >> Hi folks, >> >> Some time back I offered to be RM for 4.1.x , since then I took on the >> GSoC effort and won't have time to be the RM. >> >> Therefore the position is up for

Re: 4.1 release manager

2013-05-25 Thread Outback Dingo
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Sebastien Goasguen wrote: > Hi folks, > > Some time back I offered to be RM for 4.1.x , since then I took on the > GSoC effort and won't have time to be the RM. > > Therefore the position is up for grabs. > > Any takers ? > can we get a brief description of the r