Sounds reasonable to me. -- Erik
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 1:17 PM, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com> wrote: > If no objections I will reset the default to 4.4.1 (the lowest required > version) include Rafaels pr for kvm/centos packaging and create a new rc. > > Op ma 1 jun. 2015 om 11:54 schreef Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com > >: > > > So we will have to include an update in every release and we will > probably > > forget about that pretty soon. > > > > Op ma 1 jun. 2015 om 11:49 schreef Remi Bergsma <r...@remi.nl>: > > > >> I'd say, as a default: 4.4.0 will be nice for any 4.4.x release, and > 4.5.0 > >> for 4.5.x etc. This is also close to what was hard-coded before. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Remi > >> > >> > >> 2015-06-01 11:33 GMT+02:00 Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com>: > >> > >> > Guess we'll be making a new rc. The value can be 0.0.0 for my part, it > >> must > >> > be an operator decision to set the MinVRVersion if it must be higher. > It > >> > will always be an upgrade matter and any seeded template should be > >> accepted > >> > as per the installation notes. Of course the other side of the issue > is > >> > whether a version will work at all. The operator can create a version > of > >> > the template with their own versioning scheme, however. I should be > >> writing > >> > all this in another {DISCUSS]-thread. > >> > > >> > cancelling the RC to add code for Bruno's requirement. > >> > > >> > Op ma 1 jun. 2015 om 08:35 schreef Milamber <milam...@apache.org>: > >> > > >> > > > >> > > Please note: I my case, there isn't an upgrade, I have the issue > with > >> > > 4.4.3 or 4.4.4 fresh installation (out of the box, from git tag > >> > > 4.4-RC20150529T2004) > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > On 01/06/2015 07:22, Erik Weber wrote: > >> > > > If it means that all upgrades are unable to do VR related tasks ( > >> > > starting > >> > > > VMs for one.. ), I'd call that regression and redo. > >> > > > Relying on all our users to do manual fixing just because we don't > >> want > >> > > to > >> > > > call off the RC is bad IMHO. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >