Marco, As I said in the 5.0.0 thread, I believe that we need to look upon architectural improvement as a continuous process. We have been stymied for years around an analysis paralysis that holds that we must address architectural issue in 5.0.0. I believe that we need to start with remove a significant amount of technical debt and cruft in 5.0.0 which will lay the foundation for larger architectural improvements later in 2017.
Thanks, -John > john.burw...@shapeblue.com www.shapeblue.com 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK @shapeblue On Jun 15, 2016, at 7:48 AM, ma...@exoscale.ch wrote: > > Hi, > > From my CS starter point of view, I agree with John's comment. I would really > like to see the next major version with a code & architecture clean-up, > especially producing a code architecture in the direction of the Java9 Jigsaw > modularity. It would be sad not to take the next specifications into account. > For the dates, it's good to produce periodically a new release for the 4.X > but I don't see how putting one on the first 5.x version can be done before > defining what will be it. > > Marco > > -- To introduce myself, I joined Exoscale a few months ago to work on CS code > base to suit their needs. > > >> On 15 Jun 2016, at 11:31, Rajani Karuturi <raj...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> I like this discussion. But, my original question was not about what should >> the next release number be? >> >> i was checking if anyone working on anything big and hence want the next >> release to be 5.0? >> >> ~Rajani >> >> <http://cloudplatform.accelerite.com/> >> >> >> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> maybe I should have answered here instead of the other thread :S >>> >>> I am all with John on this. I can not judge the dates but the overall ideas >>> are spot on. >>> >>> I now see the API weren't mentioned in this thread I think they should. >>> >>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 1:53 AM, ilya <ilya.mailing.li...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I agree and support John's comments below. >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> ilya >>>> >>>> On 6/14/16 2:44 PM, John Burwell wrote: >>>>> All, >>>>> >>>>> Completely agree with Daan. Per semantic versioning, a major revision >>>> increase must introduce a backwards incompatible change in the public >>> API, >>>> removal of one of more supported devices, reduction in the list of >>>> supported distributions. I agree that when we require Java8+, drop >>> Ubuntu >>>> 12.04 support, drop support for an old hypervisor version, etc, we will >>>> need to increment the major revision to reflect the fact that the release >>>> is not backwards compatible. >>>>> >>>>> For 4.10 and LTS 4.9.0_1, I see it as critical that we support running >>>> on either Java7 or Java8. In particular, producing an LTS release that >>>> only supports a JVM that has been unsupported for nearly 18 months would >>>> make it DOA in many shops. >>>>> >>>>> It seems like it would make sense to have a 5.0.0 release that removed >>>> support for a number of legacy components (e.g. Xen 6.0 possibly 6.2, >>>> Java7, CentOS 5, etc), as well as, internal improvements (e.g. simplified >>>> configuration). The focus of this release would be to reduce the >>> footprint >>>> of codebase, as well as, make a set of backwards incompatible changes >>> that >>>> further decouples plugins from core. We would then plan for a 6.0.0 in >>>> 4Q2017 to introduce further architectural changes and API revisions. The >>>> advantage to this approach is that it breaks up the large refactorings >>> and >>>> architectural design changes — allowing us to gain velocity by removing >>>> legacy components, reducing the risk of these changes, and providing user >>>> benefit earlier. Based on the release plan I previously proposed we have >>>> the following releases remaining in 2016 and in early 2017: >>>>> >>>>> * 4.10 releasing on or about 28 August 2016 >>>>> * 4.11 releasing on or about 23 October 2016 >>>>> * 4.12 releasing on or about 18 December 2016 >>>>> * 4.13 release on or about 5 February 2017 >>>>> >>>>> 4.12 seems to be the sweet spot in the schedule to cut the 5.0.0 >>> release >>>> described above. It would give us sometime to plan and gain consensus >>>> around the changes in both the user and dev communities. It would also >>>> allow the second LTS release to be based on 5.0.0 — allowing both release >>>> cycles to take advantage of the reduced support requirements and Java8 >>>> language features. Based on this proposal, the releases above would >>> change >>>> to the following: >>>>> >>>>> * 4.10 releasing on or about 28 August 2016 >>>>> * 4.11 releasing on or about 23 October 2016 >>>>> * 5.0.0 releasing on or about 18 December 2016 >>>>> * 5.1.0 release on or about 5 February 2017 >>>>> >>>>> I am in the process of moving my proposal into the wiki. If this >>>> approach is acceptable, I will reflect it there, and open a thread to >>>> discuss 5.0.0. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> -John >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> john.burw...@shapeblue.com >>>>> www.shapeblue.com >>>>> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK >>>>> @shapeblue >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Jun 14, 2016, at 2:02 PM, Paul Angus <paul.an...@shapeblue.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> +1 Daan. >>>>>> >>>>>> My recollection was that major version number changes were only to be >>>> triggered by breaks in backward compatibility (API). >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Kind regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> Paul Angus >>>>>> >>>>>> paul.an...@shapeblue.com >>>>>> www.shapeblue.com >>>>>> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK >>>>>> @shapeblue >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com] >>>>>> Sent: 14 June 2016 14:47 >>>>>> To: dev <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> >>>>>> Cc: Rajani Karuturi <raj...@apache.org> >>>>>> Subject: Re: 4.9+ release >>>>>> >>>>>> You know that would require more then one byte for our minor version, >>>> Will. >>>>>> I would be very pleased to go to 5.0 before that time. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 3:43 PM, Will Stevens <wstev...@cloudops.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Daan is just trying to get us to version 4.256. :P >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *Will STEVENS* >>>>>>> Lead Developer >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts >>>>>>> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 w cloudops.com *|* >>> tw >>>>>>> @CloudOps_ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 9:41 AM, Daan Hoogland >>>>>>> <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -1 to what Wido said. None of those points warant a major release >>>>>>>> number upgrade. these should all be in 4.10, -.11, -12 etc. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> major incompatibilities like API refactor, dropping backend support >>>>>>>> for this or that hyporvisor or DB refactor are the things that >>>>>>>> warrant 5.0, IMNSHO >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 1:13 PM, Will Stevens >>>>>>>> <williamstev...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> +1. :) >>>>>>>>> On Jun 14, 2016 5:07 AM, "Wido den Hollander" <w...@widodh.nl> >>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Op 14 juni 2016 om 10:55 schreef Rajani Karuturi < >>>>>>> raj...@apache.org >>>>>>>>> : >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 4.10 or 5.0? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I would say 4.10 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> We are in the 4.* release cycle from a long time. >>>>>>>>>>> Just wanted to check if anyone is planning on major changes >>>>>>>>>>> which >>>>>>>>>> warrants >>>>>>>>>>> 5.0 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 5.0 should imho be: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> - Java 8 >>>>>>>>>> - Ubuntu 16.04 / systemd support >>>>>>>>>> - Drop support for older libvirt versions (KVM) >>>>>>>>>> - Some killer feature(s) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Wido >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> ~Rajani >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Daan >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Daan >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Daan >>> >
