Animesh, Without wanting to pass judgement on the quality of those tests or the accuracy with which they were performed, there is now a mismatch between what passed those tests and what people expect to work in the current release. I assume that the tests where performed at an acceptable level of expertise and I expect they were programmed at such a level. This would leave only the coverage as a cause of our present problem.
To get back to the subject of the thread; If the bugs are in new features that is completely acceptable to me. If the bug are newly discovered in old features as well. If however new bugs are introduced to old features that people are using anywhere, this cuts them of from upgrading with the rest of us. I would say no men gets left behind. If need be new features need to be cut out but better is fix everything that is introduced in this release. €0,02 Daan On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 8:31 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi <animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com> wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Marcus Sorensen [mailto:shadow...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 11:10 AM >> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round) >> >> We just need to have basic automated testing of every core supported >> platform. With 4.1 we released a product that didn't even work on >> Ubuntu KVM, nobody tested it. As long as we rely on devs to >> individually test things at their leisure, we will always end up with 3- >> 4 round release votes. An RC should pass a test suite first, and that >> test suite should do a basic test for every item we claim support for, >> BEFORE it goes up for a vote. > > [Animesh>] It did may be you missed the test results from Prasanna for this > VOTE. > > >> On Sep 9, 2013 12:02 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal" >> <chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> >> wrote: >> >> > Agree with Animesh. >> > From a somewhat selfish perspective, I've gone through 2 rounds of >> > testing, not relishing the 3rd round. >> > There are literally hundreds of features in CloudStack. Another delay >> > could bring one more bug (existing perhaps, or newly introduced). >> > And another round of testing. >> > >> > Draw the line somewhere. >> > -- >> > Chiradeep >> > >> > >> > On 9/9/13 10:51 AM, "Animesh Chaturvedi" >> > <animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > >> > > >> > >> -----Original Message----- >> > >> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] >> > >> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 8:25 AM >> > >> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org >> > >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round) >> > >> >> > >> On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 10:42:48AM -0400, Simon Weller wrote: >> > >> > -1 from me as well. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > I know we're trying to hit timed releases, but I think it's very >> > >> important to preserve key underlying functionality across releases. >> > >> If a supported and documented feature is known to be broken, we >> > >> need to address it...if we don't, it's going to cause lots of pain, >> > >> and reflect badly on ACS as a project. >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> Agreed. The idea of "time-based" is all about feature development. >> > >> Quality shouldn't be sacrificed. >> > > >> > >[Animesh>] But we have to draw the line at some point otherwise we >> > >cannot maintain a 4 month cadence. 4.3 code freeze is in just 6-7 >> > >weeks and this is our 4th VOTE round for 4.2. IMHO if something is in >> > >core orchestration layer, failed upgrade, cannot install and the >> > >likes and affects most users it should block a release. Other >> > >remaining issues should be picked up for subsequent maintenance >> > >release. May be we should discuss when should be the next maintenance >> > >release on 4.2, 4 weeks or 6 weeks rather than delaying 4.2. >> > > >> > >> >
