This topic was already discussed here: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@cloudstack.apache.org/msg03235.html
The consensus then was "revisit *after* 4.2". I won't rehash the pros and cons, please do familiarize yourself with that thread. On 5/29/13 10:10 PM, "Mike Tutkowski" <mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote: >+1 Four weeks extra would be ideal in this situation. > > >On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 10:48 PM, Sebastien Goasguen ><run...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> >> >> On 30 May 2013, at 06:34, Chip Childers <chip.child...@sungard.com> >>wrote: >> >> > On May 29, 2013, at 7:59 PM, John Burwell <jburw...@basho.com> wrote: >> > >> >> All, >> >> >> >> Since we have taken an eight (8) week delay completing the 4.1.0 >> release, I would like propose that we re-evaluate the timelines for the >> 4.2.0 release. When the schedule was originally conceived, it was >>intended >> that the project would have eight (8) weeks to focus exclusively on >>4.2.0 >> development. Unfortunately, this delay has created an unfortunate >>conflict >> between squashing 4.1.0 bugs and completing 4.2.0 features. I propose >>that >> we acknowledge this schedule impact, and push back the 4.2.0 feature >>freeze >> date by eight (8) weeks to 2 August 2013. This delay will give the >>project >> time to properly review merges and address issues holistically, and, >> hopefully, relieve a good bit of the stress incurred by the simultaneous >> 4.1.0 and 4.2.0 activities. >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> -John >> > >> > This is a reasonable idea IMO. I'd probably only extend by a month >> > personally, but your logic is sound. I'd much rather have reasoned >> > discussions about code than argue procedural issues about timing any >> > day. This might help facilitate that on some of the features folks are >> > scrambling to complete. >> > >> > Others? >> >> I am +1 on this, 4 weeks maybe ? > > > > >-- >*Mike Tutkowski* >*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* >e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com >o: 303.746.7302 >Advancing the way the world uses the >cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play> >**
