Hi Carlo, Brad,
<lurk mode off>
On Thu, 19 Jun 2008, Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 09:33:26AM -0600, Brad Nicholes wrote:
>
>> It's time to get Ganglia 3.1 out the door.
>
> Brad, by the time you made this statement :
>
> * AIX users had no working build
> * Fedora Linux ppc64 users wouldn't be able to build a package
> * OpenSuSE 10.3 users are still figuring out where to get a working libconfuse
> * MacOS X 10.5 users have no working build, and users of older versions have
> a broken libconfuse dependency and most likely a broken build
> * HPUX users have no working build
> * OpenBSD amd64 users will get their modules installed in an odd directory
> that doesn't exist otherwise in their systems
> * DragonFlyBSD users had never had the luxury of having a working snapshot
> to use for testing.
> * Solaris users trying to reuse the libapr that comes with apache will have
> a broken build because of an internal header conflict.
> * CentOS 4 users are getting used to the idea of using some packages they had
> been told are not safe, as dependencies.
> * Windows users had only a static build to use.
This reads like a pretty hefty list of showstoppers....
> what makes you think ganglia 3.1 is ready to get out of the door?
I concur.
I was also a bit surprised that no official beta was planned before the
first release candidates show up.
<snip>
>> Unless there is something that should be considered to be a
>> show-stopper, I propose that we tag and roll Ganglia 3.1 RC1
>> immediately and start testing. Once Ganglia 3.1 RC1 tarballs have
>> been made available, then we allow a two week test period. If no
>> show-stoppers or major issues are found within the two week period,
>> then at the end of the two week period we officially release Gangia
>> 3.1.
>
> ganglia 3.1 should be released when it is ready and unless there is some time
> constrain which I am unaware of.
>
> rushing a release is not in anyone's interest and will only result in unhappy
> users finding themselves as beta testers of what they expected to be a stable
> release. A well organized beta which will cover all platforms, distributions
> and scenarios we expect to have in production is.
I fully agree. Even if we (in Cologne) are too pressed for time and warm
bodies to do any testing, we would love to upgrade to 3.1. But more or
less becoming a beta tester is not something we would do in our production
environment. A stable release has to be just that: a stable release.
Even if I will need my asbstos suit after my following remark, I will
say it out loud: Rushing out a release and getting all users to beta test
(while claiming a stable product) is 'microsoftish'. We surely can do
better than that!
While I expect a fair share of bugs even in a stable release (beta
testing only goes so far), at least the glaring issues should be fixed
first.
btw, I hope the python gmetad will not replace the C gmetad in the
future. We have seen far too many memory leaks in python applications to
feel comfortable with. A process that should be 10 MB in size blowing up
to 1.5 GB over a few weeks is not really anything we want to see again.
Cheers from Cologne,
<lurk mode on>
Dipl. Chem. Dr. Stephan Wonczak
Zentrum fuer Angewandte Informatik (ZAIK)
Regionales Rechenzentrum der Universitaet zu Koeln (RRZK)
Universitaet zu Koeln, Robert-Koch-Strasse 10, 50931 Koeln
Tel: ++49/(0)221/478-5577, Fax: ++49/(0)221/478-5590
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
_______________________________________________
Ganglia-developers mailing list
Ganglia-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ganglia-developers
