-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 04/22/2015 12:38 AM, Andrei Mikhailovsky wrote: > Ilya, Mark, thanks for your feedback, > > I also see the need to restructure the release schedule for ACS as > the current release cycles are not really working. There is no > _reliable_ release cycle of the product and as we have recently > seen with the 4.5 branch, the release did not happen for months and > it is still not clear when this will take place. In my (I must > admit somewhat limited) experience if there are no deadlines, > developers are not keen on releases and the release are likely to > be delayed. This is what we've seen with the past ACS releases, > they are overdue by many months. > > The community might get a much better responce if there is a much > shorter release cycle even if it means pushing out less features > with each release. At least some features will get completed, > tested and implemented in a set time frame. I would rather see a > release cycle of every 3-4 months with 5 new features than a > release with 15 new features which may or may not get released > every 9 - 12 months. > > By any means, please comment if someone disagrees or thinks there > is a better alternative. > Well, one of my comments on this is that you expect the developers to have all the time available to actually work on this. Remember that most people have a $dayjob on which they need to focus and that finding the time to work on ACS is sometimes difficult. Myself for example, the last few months I haven't been able to work on ACS as much as I wanted to. My TODO list is full of things I want to work on, but simply can't get to. I can imagine this happens with more developers, they can't find the time to work on ACS. So as much as I would love to see very frequent releases of ACS, we also have to think about the resources which are required to make that happen. In the end it all comes down to more hands writing code and doing stuff for the project. Wido > Andrei ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "ilya" <ilya.mailing.li...@gmail.com> To: >> dev@cloudstack.apache.org Sent: Tuesday, 21 April, 2015 7:30:34 >> PM Subject: Re: Next ACS release? > >> Andrei, > >> To best of my knowledge, both 4.4.x and 4.5.x are being worked >> on actively. As a community, we need to get better on QA of each >> release - this is something we are planning to cover this year >> with distributed QA model, this was not widely discussed yet but >> something we need to tackle. > >> 4.5 rc2 got stalled and we need to restart. We had a 4 month >> release cycle, but we can really stick to it hard - as its >> community driven. May will have to revise it down to 6 months or >> so. > >> Regards ilya > >> On 4/21/15 1:26 AM, Andrei Mikhailovsky wrote: >>> Hello guys, >>> >>> Looking at the dev and user lists it is becoming less certain >>> if version 4.5.x is ever coming out. It seems like a few months >>> have passed since the not so fortunate release of 4.5.0 and I >>> can't find a release schedule for the 4.5.1, which seems to >>> have stopped at rc2 stage and haven't progressed further to a >>> release stage. >>> >>> Are we likely to see any progress with the 4.5.x branch or is >>> the community switching towards the 4.6.x branch without >>> releasing the 4.5.x? >>> >>> I am a bit unclear as there are no release dates, schedules or >>> dead lines that the community should work with. Possibly as a >>> result of this, the ACS releases are not being released on time >>> or fast enough. >>> >>> Does it make sense to introduce release schedules for ACS that >>> the dev community should stick to? Similar to what is being >>> done in many other projects, like Ubuntu, etc. Or would this >>> break the ACS project releases even more? >>> >>> Andrei >>> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJVN0pnAAoJEAGbWC3bPspCj9oP/A+wBs47t3lEWLgb/LOAEeC/ oCDypTH+iBrX6sFdcD+HYof+XI979z6T70gYBxHYfxTxnscPOdQfdtWMHsUBkY6w /UVeWkMQl7RwmnN8Uq2ASNSVoTe9rLSxXkjjvrDMO4mcjnNSEkWKv2tk5lC1o0ac ryN01Acs/usZSJ5VdmaW/ixgVdeEV1qbCD20OIq4/z/vnmy+Ef+ui0GkopltlZ8I bzPhRX6Dj4LAFujlVaIuxR/hbV7z9GJi6YMcPTB9GfdgM4cZVUYl802UZ0NGvnzg 7lW4CdSa0obM2HeakpdH1VGaWr4TxjVROaOZjZ8VkzDXOS0rJ0HgWktvk5z+uZXh GSNgAlkWQoGhcP20Mls23WcGGktveLHxzfbAVDo7YSS5a/Q7ejDVVMVL1T/w7P0V I7l/TCTkGYZHRTBrQxMSTRoW1Ieo192opAio09y12KtMeb7rpvh0OD6kHpkgHaoB 6uXWmOqy1eUnqkS5NxfecV+f6weNpHioug0irrLfqiZPA2PmnrNJzMNATR9AqbxB 1ohOwoPr8Rewbm96RtgsAR+/8yroLbPL0lHZni5AKklvdUlEL28vzT0ceve7tua3 anzLX4PLkXuzKrWNzawQbdr+5el/CvJW3pZ3yNlNG+b4qgskBmy3Sub/9S2dnDrp +u5v88xGl5YFWpefLKb0 =FIJ3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
