t;>> low level nio and rpc code goes away), a distributed message bus and
>>>> locking service (that we thought to introduce in 4.2,4.3 but
>> incomplete),
>>>> and refactor the networking/VR layer with a new VR. Not to mention
>>> cleanup
>>>> some techn
l debt. The keywords being major architectural and
api/integrational changes. Some of this maybe on-going, but we'll get
to
5.x with patience over time.
Regards,
Rohit Yadav
From: Ivan Kudryavtsev
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2019 9:15:29 AM
To: users; dev
Subject: W
e networking/VR layer with a new VR. Not to mention
> > cleanup
> > > some technical debt. The keywords being major architectural and
> > > api/integrational changes. Some of this maybe on-going, but we'll get
> to
> > > 5.x with patience over time.
> > >
>
> 5.x with patience over time.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Rohit Yadav
> >
> >
> > From: Ivan Kudryavtsev
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2019 9:15:29 AM
> > To: users; dev
> > Subject: Why CloudStack 5
> >
&g
al changes. Some of this maybe on-going, but we'll get to
> 5.x with patience over time.
>
> Regards,
> Rohit Yadav
>
>
> From: Ivan Kudryavtsev
> Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2019 9:15:29 AM
> To: users; dev
> Subject: Why CloudStack 5
&g
Kudryavtsev
> Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2019 9:15:29 AM
> To: users; dev
> Subject: Why CloudStack 5
>
> I decided whether to write it several weeks thinking about the stones and
> rotten potatoes, but still decided to do that. Hope it will not raise the
> stress level.
>
>
changes. Some of this maybe
on-going, but we'll get to 5.x with patience over time.
Regards,
Rohit Yadav
From: Ivan Kudryavtsev
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2019 9:15:29 AM
To: users; dev
Subject: Why CloudStack 5
I decided whether to write it several weeks thinking
That sounds reasonable to me.
From: Rafael Weingärtner
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 5:25 PM
To: users
Cc: d...@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: Why CloudStack 5
NetApp Security WARNING: This is an external email. Do not click links or open
attachments
Rafael Weingärtner
> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 4:58 PM
> To: dev
> Cc: users
> Subject: Re: Why CloudStack 5
>
> NetApp Security WARNING: This is an external email. Do not click links or
> open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is
> saf
Is 4.12 a decent candidate to be branded 5.0 or might we be waiting for some
specific set of backwards-incompatible updates?
From: Rafael Weingärtner
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 4:58 PM
To: dev
Cc: users
Subject: Re: Why CloudStack 5
NetApp Security
Hello Ivan,
Can you provide reasons why not move to a version 5?
To help you, I will provide why I think we should move to 5.0.0 after 4.12.
Therefore, I would expect this 5.0.0 to be an LTS version as well.
1. To begin with, technically, we should already be in version 5 if we
had been
I decided whether to write it several weeks thinking about the stones and
rotten potatoes, but still decided to do that. Hope it will not raise the
stress level.
Colleagues and ACS leaders, I would like to initiate the discussion. Why go
to CS5 rather than stay with 4.XX. Some thoughts are:
1.
12 matches
Mail list logo
