Fwd: Re: Page update question

[Ron Wheeler]

I received this from Apache about the process to update the Cloudstack 
project page.


I hope that this will allow the PMC to update the release information as 
well as any other information on that page.


Ron

 Forwarded Message 


The projects site is officially managed by ComDev but the content is
dependent on the projects keeping their information up to date. I did a
quick search and found this that gives some basic instructions (How the
Code Works section) and links for what needs to be done.

https://projects.apache.org/about.html

I hope this helps.

Thanks
Sharan

On 27.6.2018 16:57, Ron Wheeler wrote:

https://projects.apache.org/project.html?cloudstack

This page is badly out of date and no one in the project seems to know 
how to fix it.


Is there a page describing how the PMC should update it?

Ron

Re: Working with a 'PendingReleaseNotes' file

[Wido den Hollander]

On 06/22/2018 07:52 AM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> Looks like a good idea, +1.
> 

I've opened a PR for this: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2723

If we want to go through with this we should merge the PR and then
update the Github template for a PR as well to make this a new checkbox.

Other places of documentation which we need to update?

Wido

> 
> - Rohit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: Wido den Hollander 
> Sent: Friday, June 22, 2018 12:13:49 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Daan Hoogland
> Cc: Rafael Weingärtner
> Subject: Re: Working with a 'PendingReleaseNotes' file
> 
> 
> 
> On 06/21/2018 05:13 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote:
>> Wido, I like the idea that we can generate from git what has happened since
>> last time. I also recognise that we don't do that properly all the time.
> 
> True. But a bunch of commits don't akways tell the exact story. Well,
> they do, but not for the end-user.
> 
>> What this comes down to is discipline, however we implement it. Deciding if
>> a change is big enough would be up to both the author and the reviewer and
>> we could ask for a comment tagged "Release Note:" as well. Just saying many
>> ways to do this. going with your idea from the ceph community. Where do we
>> move the release notes when the release is out? and when? (release
>> candidate/first thing after approval/part of the release commit)
>>
> 
> You would move it to a file called "ReleaseNotes" afterwards, that is
> done by the Release Manager.
> 
> Wido
> 
> 
> rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com 
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK
> @shapeblue
>   
>  
> 
>> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 11:05 AM, Wido den Hollander  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 06/20/2018 07:53 AM, Rafael Weingärtner wrote:
 It seems so. It can then be a part of the PR. I mean, in the PR we could
 require a commit that updates this file.
>>>
>>> Yes, that would be the thing. When you send a PR with a change that is
>>> 'big enough' you also include updating the Pending Release Notes file.
>>>
 Of course, we need to discuss if all PRs should update it, or only
 important things should go in.

>>>
>>> I think only important things and that it's up to the developer to guess
>>> if it's important enough to go into the PendingReleaseNotes file.
>>>
>>> Wido
>>>
 +1

 On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 11:00 PM, Wido den Hollander 
>>> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> At the Ceph project we work with a Pending Release Notes [0].
>
> The idea is that if a developer writes a new feature or fixes something
> that changes functionality (or adds one) she/he also updates the
> PendingReleaseNotes file.
>
> That way when a new version is released it's easier for the Release
> Manager to know what to highlight.
>
> Although we can try to get everything from Jira and Github Issues it
> might be difficult to use the proper wording.
>
> On every release the files is cleared and people start to add again.
>
> Would this be something which could benefit CloudStack and make the
> release notes easier and more complete?
>
> Wido
>
> [0]: https://github.com/ceph/ceph/blob/master/PendingReleaseNotes
>



>>>
>>
>>
>>
> 

Re: [DISCUSS] Blocking the creation of new Basic Networking zones

[Wido den Hollander]

On 06/22/2018 08:04 AM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> Good idea, but a lot of things supported in advanced zone with KVM may not be 
> supported in case of VMware, XenServer etc. The larger refactoring will need 
> to account for how in various places checks exists how behaviors are enforced 
> when the zone is basic or not, and what kind of impact will it have on 
> non-KVM users using basic zone (if any) along with having an upgrade path for 
> such users.
> 

I have no experience with VMWare nor XenServer, but doesn't Advanced
Networking with a Shared VLAN work the same on those?

> 
> If the overall functionality is retained and a seamless upgrade path can be 
> created a new major release 5.0 is not be necessary (that should be a 
> different thread with inputs from various stakeholders on various topics).
> 

A upgrade will be very difficult to convert a Basic Network to Advanced
as bridges on the HV need to be changed and this can vary per deployment.

> 
> Wrt support of the next Java version, we'll need to consider the distro 
> provided Java version for a long time Java8 will be supported [1] but newer 
> versions Java 9/10 onwards are short-term non-LTS releases, debian 
> testing/next don't even have openjdk-9/10 packages yet.
> 
> 
> [1] http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/eol-135779.html
> 
> 
> - Rohit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: Wido den Hollander 
> Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2018 8:26:40 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Blocking the creation of new Basic Networking zones
> 
> For now I've created a Pull Request so we can have a discussion about it
> there: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2720
> 
> Wido
> 
> On 06/21/2018 02:34 PM, Gabriel Beims Bräscher wrote:
>> +1
>>
>> We have an empty page regarding 5.0 [1] in the Design documents section
>> [2]. It might be a good spot to sort out CloudStack 5.0 plans.
>>
>> [1]
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/5.0+Design+Documents
>> [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Design
>>
>> 2018-06-21 5:58 GMT-03:00 Daan Hoogland :
>>
>>> well, that one is a good one to update, but there was a dedicated 5.0 page
>>> at some time. I think we can just use this from here on in and merge
>>> anything else in it when we find it ;)
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 8:49 AM, Rafael Weingärtner <
>>> rafaelweingart...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 This one [1]?

 [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Roadmap

 On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Daan Hoogland >>>
 wrote:

> Wido, there used to be a page on cwiki with plans for 5.0, I can not
>>> find
> it anymore but this should be added to it.
>
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 6:42 PM, ilya musayev <
> ilya.mailing.li...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I think the simplicity of Basic Zone was - you can get away with 1
>>> VLAN
>> for everything (great for POC setup) where as Advanced Shared with
>>> VLAN
>> isolation requires several VLANs to get going.
>>
>> How would we cover this use case?
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 11:34 AM Tutkowski, Mike <
>> mike.tutkow...@netapp.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Also, yes, I agree with the list you provided, Wido. We might have
>>> to
>>> break “other fancy stuff” into more detail, though. ;)
>>>
>>> On 6/20/18, 12:32 PM, "Tutkowski, Mike" 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Sorry, Wido :) I missed that part.
>>>
>>> On 6/20/18, 5:03 AM, "Wido den Hollander" 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 06/20/2018 12:31 AM, Tutkowski, Mike wrote:
>>> > If this initiative goes through, perhaps that’s a good
>>> time
 to
>>> bump CloudStack’s release number to 5.0.0?
>>> >
>>>
>>> That's what I said in my e-mail :-) But yes, I agree with
>>> you,
>>> this
>>> might be a good time to bump it to 5.0
>>>
>>> With that we would:
>>>
>>> - Drop creation of new Basic Networking Zones
>>> - Support IPv6 in shared IPv6 networks
>>> - Java 9?
>>> - Drop support for Ubuntu 12.04
>>> - Other fancy stuff?
>>> - Support ConfigDrive in all scenarios properly
>>>
>>> How would that sound?
>>>
>>> Wido
>>>
>>> >> On Jun 19, 2018, at 3:17 PM, Wido den Hollander <
>>> w...@widodh.nl> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>> On 06/19/2018 11:07 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote:
>>> >>> I like this initiative, and here comes the big but even
>>> though I myself
>>> >>> might think it is not valid; Basic zones are there to
 give a
>>> simple start
>>> >>> for new users. If we can give a one-knob start/one page
>>> wizard for creating
>>> >