atom feed30 messages in org.apache.incubator.cloudstack-dev[DISCUSS] ACS Release 4 month v/s 6 m...
FromSent OnAttachments
Animesh ChaturvediApr 22, 2013 2:19 pm 
Animesh ChaturvediApr 22, 2013 4:07 pm 
Frank ZhangApr 22, 2013 4:18 pm 
Min ChenApr 22, 2013 4:22 pm 
Musayev, IlyaApr 22, 2013 4:47 pm 
Kelven YangApr 22, 2013 5:49 pm 
David NalleyApr 22, 2013 7:51 pm 
Edison SuApr 22, 2013 8:13 pm 
Sudha PonnagantiApr 22, 2013 9:00 pm 
Radhika PuthiyetathApr 22, 2013 9:36 pm 
Mice XiaApr 22, 2013 10:03 pm 
Nitin MehtaApr 22, 2013 10:32 pm 
Sebastien GoasguenApr 23, 2013 12:30 am 
Hugo TrippaersApr 23, 2013 4:35 am 
Joe BrockmeierApr 23, 2013 6:15 am 
Prasanna SanthanamApr 23, 2013 7:18 am 
Will ChanApr 23, 2013 10:55 am 
Rohit YadavApr 23, 2013 10:57 am 
Chip ChildersApr 23, 2013 11:18 am 
Will ChanApr 23, 2013 2:29 pm 
Animesh ChaturvediApr 23, 2013 3:33 pm 
Sudha PonnagantiApr 23, 2013 4:25 pm 
Alex HuangApr 23, 2013 10:29 pm 
Noah SlaterApr 24, 2013 4:22 am 
Chip ChildersApr 25, 2013 9:24 am 
Animesh ChaturvediApr 25, 2013 5:02 pm 
Chip ChildersApr 25, 2013 5:11 pm 
Animesh ChaturvediApr 25, 2013 5:25 pm 
prasannaApr 25, 2013 9:05 pm 
Noah SlaterApr 26, 2013 3:46 am 
Subject:[DISCUSS] ACS Release 4 month v/s 6 month
From:Animesh Chaturvedi (anim@citrix.com)
Date:Apr 22, 2013 2:19:58 pm
List:org.apache.incubator.cloudstack-dev

Folks

We started discussing 4 month v/s 6 month release cycle in a another thread [1].
Since the subject of that thread was different, community may not have
participated in this important discussion fully. I am are bringing this
discussion to its own thread. Here is the summary so far please refer to [1] for
more details.

Summary of discussion: - Animesh pointed out the technical debt that we have accumulated so far needs
extra time to resolve - David, Chip favor shorter release cycle of 4 month and keeping master always
stable and in good quality and enhancing automation as a solution to reduce QA
manual effort. A focused defect fixing activity may be needed to reduce
technical debt - Will brought up several points in the discussion: He called out heavy
dependence on manual QA for a release and pointed out that manual QA may not be
always available to match up ACS release schedule. Release overhead for 4 month
release is still high and suggest that moving to 6 month will save on release
overhead and that time can be used for strengthening automation. - Joe agrees partly in release overhead being significant for major release

If I missed out any important point please feel free to bring into the thread.

There were some other discussion in [1] on release planning conference and
chip's clarification on time based v/s feature based releases but we will not
discuss those in this thread. Community has agreed to time-based release
already.

[1] http://markmail.org/thread/6suq2fhltdvgvcxd