: [ASFCS42] Proposed schedule for our next release
Joe thanks for bringing this up and noting that the subject may not have got
everyone's attention. I will start a separate thread on 4 month v/s 6 month
Animesh
-Original Message-
From: Joe Brockmeier [mailto:j...@zonker.net
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013, at 04:50 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
Based on the community discussions of having 4 month cadence I am
proposing the following schedule:
We seem to have gone off the rails into a 4-month vs. 6-month
discussion. It's been a week since the original schedule discussion
@cloudstack.apache.org; cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [ASFCS42] Proposed schedule for our next release
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013, at 04:50 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
Based on the community discussions of having 4 month cadence I am
proposing the following schedule:
We seem to have
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 10:16:35AM +, Murali Reddy wrote:
Pardon my ignorance of project management, but it appears to me we are
talking of managing a release after half way through the cycle. May be
this is orthogonal discussion, but how about taking approach of planning a
release early
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 08:40:48AM -0700, Min Chen wrote:
I like this idea too, this will be a much better channel for community to
understand features to be planned. +1 to this.
-min
On 4/19/13 7:02 AM, Prasanna Santhanam t...@apache.org wrote:
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 10:16:35AM +,
So while I will agree that in person communication is faster, and has
higher throughput, it's not without problems for decision making for
this community.
First it dramatically raises the barrier to participation. This is
supposed to be a meritocracy. But shifting decisions, especially
important
] Proposed schedule for our next release
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 02:50:02PM -0700, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
I want to call out my concern on technical debt we have accumulated so
far.
I did an analysis on JIRA bugs yesterday night PST on Affects
Version = 4.1 and created since Dec
: cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [ASFCS42] Proposed schedule for our next release
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 02:50:02PM -0700, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
I want to call out my concern on technical debt we have accumulated
so
far.
I did an analysis on JIRA bugs yesterday
...@sungard.com]
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 7:22 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [ASFCS42] Proposed schedule for our next release
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 02:50:02PM -0700, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
I want to call out my concern
Message-
From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 7:22 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [ASFCS42] Proposed schedule for our next release
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 02:50:02PM -0700, Animesh
I want to call out my concern on technical debt we have accumulated so far.
I did an analysis on JIRA bugs yesterday night PST on Affects
Version = 4.1 and created since Dec 2012
Total records : 429
Resolution Type (Invalid, Duplicate, Cannot reproduce etc.) : 87 (30
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 02:50:02PM -0700, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
Based on the community discussions of having 4 month cadence I am proposing
the following schedule:
=
4.2 detailed schedule proposal:
=
2013-05-31
Feature
On Apr 11, 2013, at 10:33 PM, Marcus Sorensen shadow...@gmail.com
wrote:
One thing I'd like to point out, and perhaps its merely subjective,
but it seemed like from initial 4.1 feature freeze to a week or two
before the rc was supposed to be cut there wasn't much action on bug
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 7:05 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi
animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com wrote:
On Apr 11, 2013, at 10:33 PM, Marcus Sorensen shadow...@gmail.com
wrote:
One thing I'd like to point out, and perhaps its merely subjective,
but it seemed like from initial 4.1 feature
On Apr 11, 2013, at 10:33 PM, Marcus Sorensen shadow...@gmail.com
wrote:
One thing I'd like to point out, and perhaps its merely subjective,
but it seemed like from initial 4.1 feature freeze to a week or two
before the rc was supposed to be cut there wasn't much action on bug
On Apr 11, 2013, at 10:33 PM, Marcus Sorensen
shadow...@gmail.com
wrote:
One thing I'd like to point out, and perhaps its merely
subjective, but it seemed like from initial 4.1 feature freeze to
a week or two before the rc was supposed to be cut there wasn't
much
Based on the community discussions of having 4 month cadence I am proposing the
following schedule:
=
4.2 detailed schedule proposal:
=
2013-05-31
Feature Freeze
All new feature need to have been merged into master by this date.
Looking at that we fixed 217 bugs in roughly 2 months during 4.1 cycle,
fixing the backlog of bug will probably take us 2 months. Should we extend
the 4.2 test cycle by 2 months [Original Schedule: 6/1 - 7/22, Extended
Schedule: 6/1-9/22] to reduce the technical debt significantly? I
One thing I'd like to point out, and perhaps its merely subjective, but it
seemed like from initial 4.1 feature freeze to a week or two before the rc
was supposed to be cut there wasn't much action on bug fixing. It wasn't
until the deadlines started becoming imminent that people came back to work
On Apr 11, 2013, at 10:33 PM, Marcus Sorensen shadow...@gmail.com wrote:
One thing I'd like to point out, and perhaps its merely subjective, but it
seemed like from initial 4.1 feature freeze to a week or two before the rc
was supposed to be cut there wasn't much action on bug fixing. It
20 matches
Mail list logo
