Then we create a 4.6.0 branch, fix all of it and allow people to continue to merge broken code on master. Once we merge 4.6 back to master, most probably the 4.6 stuff won’t work anymore. I have seen it before.
I would still say +1 for the freeze and suggest that we get the contributors aligned on the procedures. If a contributor doesn’t have time to: 1. Jira ticket 2. Proper description of what it fixes/improves 3. Unit and/or Integration tests 4. Test the fix + other basic features So what is the point in contributing? It brings a burden to the whole community. If ACS wouldn’t be so tightly couple, perhaps we would care a bit less about the contributions that break stuff. However, when a simple change on a HyperV class - which is not even used in our infrastructure - breaks the hell out of ACS, yes.. we have to be a bit more careful about the code we get in. When we have a proper CI in place, we can be a bit more soft on the rules. Cheers, Wilder On 16 Sep 2015, at 09:38, Rohit Yadav <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: On 16-Sep-2015, at 11:47 am, Rajani Karuturi <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Here is what we propose: 1. Only BLOCKER fixes to master. If there's something else that needs to get in, it can be discussed with the RMs on a case-by-case basis. -1 -ish What you’re effectively saying is to freeze/block master from new changes until 4.6.0 releases which could take anywhere from one week to many weeks. In reality that may be undesirable and can contribute to loss of developer productivity time. Few suggestions, though I’m not sure that best way to go forward: why not create a 4.6 branch and merge it back when 4.6.0 releases? Alternatively, create a development branch on which development can continue and we merge it back to master when that branch is stable enough and 4.6.0 has released? 2. Atleast one of the reviewers of a PR should do the actual tests. We do not have good CI in place and travis just does simulator tests. +1 some of us talking in the background to setup an automated QA system to use existing marvin tests to do long running integration tests but other than Travis or Jenkins (b.a.o) we don’t have anything. Until we have a real hypervisor CI in place, manually testing the PR is a must. Also, LGTM(or +1) should be accompanied with whats tested and why you are giving LGTM. +1 at least one person other than the author should have run the PR and tested it manually or otherwise to increase reliance of the patch quality. Regards, Rohit Yadav Software Architect, ShapeBlue M. +91 88 262 30892 | [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Blog: bhaisaab.org<http://bhaisaab.org/> | Twitter: @_bhaisaab Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services IaaS Cloud Design & Build<http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//> CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework<http://shapeblue.com/csforge/> CloudStack Consulting<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/> CloudStack Software Engineering<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/> CloudStack Infrastructure Support<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/> CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courses<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/> This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or related companies. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based upon its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this email in error. Shape Blue Ltd is a company incorporated in England & Wales. ShapeBlue Services India LLP is a company incorporated in India and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. Shape Blue Brasil Consultoria Ltda is a company incorporated in Brasil and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue SA Pty Ltd is a company registered by The Republic of South Africa and is traded under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is a registered trademark.
