As a RM I had agreed to Sebatian's suggestion of fixing the docs specially
the upgrade section of it.
And off course doing a GA after the docs are fixed is on the cards.
As for the list of fixed and known issues I was told that a filter is good
enough but it should be pretty easy to get the listing in the docs itself.
If someone has specific preferences it is easy to fix that.
So it boils down to get opinion from folks on the following:
1. RC build, this does not contain docs. I have seen no complains or
issues here.
2. Putting a full listing of bug fixes in RN Vs a filter. Even I will
think full listing is good or a query (instead of a URL?)
3. Upgrade instructions are known to be bad and we will have to wait at
least till Wednesday to get these right.
We have some volunteers already working on those and their effort is
highly appreciated.
-abhi
On 15/11/13 2:50 pm, "Daan Hoogland" <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>So the -1 is because of the lack of rn and upgrade path docs, right, I
>think I proposed earlier this thread to release after the doc
>hackathon privided that. I wasn't really explicit about it I think as
>no one commented on this strategy. Would that be acceptable to you all
>(especially David and Sebastien)?
>
>I agree btw that docs must be available, but I don't think these have
>to be as stable as the release. We should allow for improving the docs
>on a release if needed. The net result of what I am proposing is that
>there will be a release and a docs rc. This is what the splitting of
>of the docs was about in my view,. Makes sense?
>
>If not, we should not try to make CCC Europe with 4.2.1. I think this
>is what the hurry is about
>
>Daan
>
>On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Sebastien Goasguen <run...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>> I might be behind on the discussions here, but I will veto an RC that
>>does not have list of bugs fixed and proper upgrade path documented
>>(minimum of a fix from 4.2.0 upgrade docs). Separate repo of the docs or
>>not.
>>
>> Right now I see that the bugs fix list points to a jira filter. This is
>>not consistent with the way it was done in prior releases (explicit
>>listing) and in 4.2 (which pointed to the RN). We need consistency. What
>>happens if someone changes this jira filter ?
>>
>> I also would like to see the results of the test matrix for 4.2.1
>>running within jenkins.buildacloud.org. This
>>http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/view/cloudstack-qa/ runs against master
>>and has been failing for a while.
>>
>> PS: I did test it and did the usual smoke test
>>
>> so -1 (binding) at this time
>>
>> -sebastien
>>
>>
>> On Nov 14, 2013, at 4:20 PM, Chip Childers <chipchild...@apache.org>
>>wrote:
>>
>>> Except that the separation only helps if it allows RC testing + voting
>>> during doc finalization. If we announce before docs, it hurts us.
>>> I'm against another announcement that goes out with the docs in poor
>>> shape.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 3:44 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi
>>> <animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>> Unless there are objection to the RC, I would prefer to have it
>>>>released and make the announcement sooner and showcase in collab
>>>>conference. As Chip mentions docs were broken out separately anyway.
>>>>
>>>> Animesh
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 14/11/13 8:12 pm, "Sebastien Goasguen" <run...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Anyway we can wait next week to release.
>>>>>
>>>>> quite a few of us will be together in Amsterdam, we can dedicate a
>>>>> hackathon session to 4.2.1 , make sure RN are good, upgrade path
>>>>> etcŠthen testŠ.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd recommend keeping the vote open until then.
>>>>>
>>>>> -sebastien
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Nov 14, 2013, at 5:57 AM, Radhika Puthiyetath
>>>>> <radhika.puthiyet...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The master has the most up-to-date RN for 4.2.1.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From: Abhinandan Prateek
>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2013 2:22 PM
>>>>>> To: CloudStack Dev
>>>>>> Cc: Radhika Puthiyetath
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ASF4.2.1] Release Notes
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It seems the upgrade section of release notes will require a review,
>>>>>> probably followed by a revamp (?).
>>>>>> Can we have some volunteers who are familiar with various upgrade
>>>>>> paths comment on it ?
>>>>>> Me and Radhika will try to consolidate those comments, snippets and
>>>>>> fix the RN for 4.2.1.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -abhi
>>>>>>
>>>>>> RN for 4.2.1 =
>>>>>>
>>>>>>https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack-docs.git;a=tree;
>>>>>>f
>>>>>> =re
>>>>>>
>>>>>>lease-notes;h=8128d62c39236331492f3642914bf97b43ed2670;hb=refs/heads/
>>>>>>4
>>>>>> .2
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
