You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cloudstack.apache.org by Will Stevens <wi...@gmail.com> on 2016/03/02 18:14:30 UTC
4.9 Release Management
Hello Everyone,
I have mentioned this in other related threads, but I wanted to make an
official thread on the topic.
I am nominating myself as the release manager for 4.9. Please feel free to
discuss if you have comments or concerns.
I will not be working alone, I will be assisted by Koushik Das and Patrick
Dube. I will be running point, but all three of us will be working
together as a unit for this release.
Our main focus for this release is the integration of hardware Continuous
Integration (CI) into the PR flow. Koushik and his team will be setting up
a CI environment which will be used for testing PRs and I will also be
setting up a CI environment for testing PRs.
The details of the CI integration will be handled publicly, but we will
likely have to work with a minimum viable implementation initially and move
forward from there. Here are some of the key aspects of the CI which are
top of mind for me.
- Standardize a feedback mechanism to post the result of CI runs back to
the relevant PR. I believe the best way to do this would be to post a
summary of the CI run in the PR thread on Github. With the existing
integration, this will then get pushed to the mailing list (since all
comments on a PR are pushed to the mailing list).
- Ideally, we will also make the CI logs available for the run. We are
still working out the details of how we do this, but we will likely be
pushing the logs to an object store with a cleanup window to remove the
logs after a set period of time (probably a week). This should give people
the opportunity to pull the logs if they are interested in the test
results, but will reduce the need for ever growing storage.
- In order to parallelize the CI operations, we will not be automatically
kicking off a CI run for every PR for now. Instead, we will communicate
between us and each run distinct PRs so we can maximize the utilization of
our hardware.
Some longer term goals of the CI in my mind are as follows:
- I would like the core CI framework to be easily distributed and
accessible to anyone who has hardware available. This would enable anyone
to setup a CI on their hardware and it would automatically be hooked up to
feedback the results to the Github PRs. I feel this is very important long
term because every individual or organization depends on a different
configuration and hardware setup, so it empowers them to validate their own
use case while adding value back to the community.
Additional details will follow, namely the release schedule etc.
Please contribute your ideas and feedback.
Cheers,
Will
Re: 4.9 Release Management
Posted by Daan Hoogland <da...@gmail.com>.
People,
I agree that CI is an important issue and I thank Will for taking owner
ship. Will: Thank you. I will keep watching the builds.apache.org part of
it and hammer on new or old :/s findbugs issues that come up.
4.9 and CI are not related directly. CI would be related to release process
and not to a release.
If the quality of 4.9 can be guaranteed by means of good code review and
partly CI (the builds.apache.org and travis jobs) partly running test jobs
by hand (in bubbles i.e. devcloud new style) as we did with 4.6 through 4.8
let's go for that and release.
€0,02
--
Daan
Re: 4.9 Release Management
Posted by Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>.
I need to talk to the other guys and start to work that out. We have to
have at least one CI environment up and running that we can validate
against before we will be able to have a clear timeline. This is a work in
progress as we speak...
*Will STEVENS*
Lead Developer
*CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_
On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 12:29 AM, Abhinandan Prateek <
abhinandan.prateek@shapeblue.com> wrote:
>
> [image: ShapeBlue] <http://www.shapeblue.com>
> Abhinandan Prateek
> Software Architect , ShapeBlue
> d: * | s: +44 203 603 0540* <%7C%20s:%20+44%20203%20603%200540> | m:
> *+91 970 11 99011* <+91%20970%2011%2099011>
> e: *abhinandan.prateek@shapeblue.com | t: *
> <abhinandan.prateek@shapeblue.com%20%7C%20t:> | w: *www.shapeblue.com*
> <http://www.shapeblue.com>
> a: 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden London WC2N 4HS UK
> 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.
> 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.
>
>
> On 03/03/16, 9:20 AM, "Koushik Das" <ko...@accelerite.com> wrote:
>
>
> >Thanks Will for initiating the discussion on 4.9 release management. As
> already mentioned, I along with Patrick will be helping out Will with the
> release process.
> >
> >Having a reliable CI system is very important going forward. There are
> discussions already happening in the list related to it. I agree that CI
> should be the top priority for 4.9 release.
> >
> >The initial idea is to run the CI manually against each PR and publish
> the results in github itself. The details of the CI environment, test
> scenarios and configurations will be published as well. Simulator based
> tests are already running as part of Travis, if required some more tests
> scenarios can be added there.
>
> Good to see you taking up CI implementation for cloudstack with others. Do
> you yet have timeline to publish a roadmap or a plan for this effort ?
>
>
> >
> >In the longer run, if more contributors/organizations come up with their
> own CI environment and help test PRs then it will be even better.
> >
> >-Koushik
> >________________________________________
> >From: Will Stevens <wi...@gmail.com>
> >Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 10:44 PM
> >To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> >Subject: 4.9 Release Management
> >
> >Hello Everyone,
> >I have mentioned this in other related threads, but I wanted to make an
> >official thread on the topic.
> >
> >I am nominating myself as the release manager for 4.9. Please feel free to
> >discuss if you have comments or concerns.
> >
> >I will not be working alone, I will be assisted by Koushik Das and Patrick
> >Dube. I will be running point, but all three of us will be working
> >together as a unit for this release.
> >
> >Our main focus for this release is the integration of hardware Continuous
> >Integration (CI) into the PR flow. Koushik and his team will be setting up
> >a CI environment which will be used for testing PRs and I will also be
> >setting up a CI environment for testing PRs.
> >
> >The details of the CI integration will be handled publicly, but we will
> >likely have to work with a minimum viable implementation initially and
> move
> >forward from there. Here are some of the key aspects of the CI which are
> >top of mind for me.
> >
> >- Standardize a feedback mechanism to post the result of CI runs back to
> >the relevant PR. I believe the best way to do this would be to post a
> >summary of the CI run in the PR thread on Github. With the existing
> >integration, this will then get pushed to the mailing list (since all
> >comments on a PR are pushed to the mailing list).
> >- Ideally, we will also make the CI logs available for the run. We are
> >still working out the details of how we do this, but we will likely be
> >pushing the logs to an object store with a cleanup window to remove the
> >logs after a set period of time (probably a week). This should give people
> >the opportunity to pull the logs if they are interested in the test
> >results, but will reduce the need for ever growing storage.
> >- In order to parallelize the CI operations, we will not be automatically
> >kicking off a CI run for every PR for now. Instead, we will communicate
> >between us and each run distinct PRs so we can maximize the utilization of
> >our hardware.
> >
> >Some longer term goals of the CI in my mind are as follows:
> >
> >- I would like the core CI framework to be easily distributed and
> >accessible to anyone who has hardware available. This would enable anyone
> >to setup a CI on their hardware and it would automatically be hooked up to
> >feedback the results to the Github PRs. I feel this is very important long
> >term because every individual or organization depends on a different
> >configuration and hardware setup, so it empowers them to validate their
> own
> >use case while adding value back to the community.
> >
> >Additional details will follow, namely the release schedule etc.
> >
> >Please contribute your ideas and feedback.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >
> >Will
> >
> >
> >DISCLAIMER
> >==========
> >This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information which is
> the property of Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business. It is intended
> only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If
> you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, retain,
> copy, print, distribute or use this message. If you have received this
> communication in error, please notify the sender and delete all copies of
> this message. Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business does not accept any
> liability for virus infected mails.
> 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/>
>
Re: 4.9 Release Management
Posted by Abhinandan Prateek <ab...@shapeblue.com>.
[ShapeBlue]<http://www.shapeblue.com>
Abhinandan Prateek
Software Architect , ShapeBlue
d: | s: +44 203 603 0540<tel:|%20s:%20+44%20203%20603%200540> | m: +91 970 11 99011<tel:+91%20970%2011%2099011>
e: abhinandan.prateek@shapeblue.com | t: <mailto:abhinandan.prateek@shapeblue.com%20|%20t:> | w: www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com>
a: 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden London WC2N 4HS UK
[cid:image0d9449.png@84acf60b.4ab55f1a]
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.
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.
On 03/03/16, 9:20 AM, "Koushik Das" <ko...@accelerite.com> wrote:
>Thanks Will for initiating the discussion on 4.9 release management. As already mentioned, I along with Patrick will be helping out Will with the release process.
>
>Having a reliable CI system is very important going forward. There are discussions already happening in the list related to it. I agree that CI should be the top priority for 4.9 release.
>
>The initial idea is to run the CI manually against each PR and publish the results in github itself. The details of the CI environment, test scenarios and configurations will be published as well. Simulator based tests are already running as part of Travis, if required some more tests scenarios can be added there.
Good to see you taking up CI implementation for cloudstack with others. Do you yet have timeline to publish a roadmap or a plan for this effort ?
>
>In the longer run, if more contributors/organizations come up with their own CI environment and help test PRs then it will be even better.
>
>-Koushik
>________________________________________
>From: Will Stevens <wi...@gmail.com>
>Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 10:44 PM
>To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>Subject: 4.9 Release Management
>
>Hello Everyone,
>I have mentioned this in other related threads, but I wanted to make an
>official thread on the topic.
>
>I am nominating myself as the release manager for 4.9. Please feel free to
>discuss if you have comments or concerns.
>
>I will not be working alone, I will be assisted by Koushik Das and Patrick
>Dube. I will be running point, but all three of us will be working
>together as a unit for this release.
>
>Our main focus for this release is the integration of hardware Continuous
>Integration (CI) into the PR flow. Koushik and his team will be setting up
>a CI environment which will be used for testing PRs and I will also be
>setting up a CI environment for testing PRs.
>
>The details of the CI integration will be handled publicly, but we will
>likely have to work with a minimum viable implementation initially and move
>forward from there. Here are some of the key aspects of the CI which are
>top of mind for me.
>
>- Standardize a feedback mechanism to post the result of CI runs back to
>the relevant PR. I believe the best way to do this would be to post a
>summary of the CI run in the PR thread on Github. With the existing
>integration, this will then get pushed to the mailing list (since all
>comments on a PR are pushed to the mailing list).
>- Ideally, we will also make the CI logs available for the run. We are
>still working out the details of how we do this, but we will likely be
>pushing the logs to an object store with a cleanup window to remove the
>logs after a set period of time (probably a week). This should give people
>the opportunity to pull the logs if they are interested in the test
>results, but will reduce the need for ever growing storage.
>- In order to parallelize the CI operations, we will not be automatically
>kicking off a CI run for every PR for now. Instead, we will communicate
>between us and each run distinct PRs so we can maximize the utilization of
>our hardware.
>
>Some longer term goals of the CI in my mind are as follows:
>
>- I would like the core CI framework to be easily distributed and
>accessible to anyone who has hardware available. This would enable anyone
>to setup a CI on their hardware and it would automatically be hooked up to
>feedback the results to the Github PRs. I feel this is very important long
>term because every individual or organization depends on a different
>configuration and hardware setup, so it empowers them to validate their own
>use case while adding value back to the community.
>
>Additional details will follow, namely the release schedule etc.
>
>Please contribute your ideas and feedback.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Will
>
>
>DISCLAIMER
>==========
>This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information which is the property of Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business. It is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, retain, copy, print, distribute or use this message. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender and delete all copies of this message. Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business does not accept any liability for virus infected mails.
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/>
Re: 4.9 Release Management
Posted by Koushik Das <ko...@accelerite.com>.
Thanks Will for initiating the discussion on 4.9 release management. As already mentioned, I along with Patrick will be helping out Will with the release process.
Having a reliable CI system is very important going forward. There are discussions already happening in the list related to it. I agree that CI should be the top priority for 4.9 release.
The initial idea is to run the CI manually against each PR and publish the results in github itself. The details of the CI environment, test scenarios and configurations will be published as well. Simulator based tests are already running as part of Travis, if required some more tests scenarios can be added there.
In the longer run, if more contributors/organizations come up with their own CI environment and help test PRs then it will be even better.
-Koushik
________________________________________
From: Will Stevens <wi...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 10:44 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: 4.9 Release Management
Hello Everyone,
I have mentioned this in other related threads, but I wanted to make an
official thread on the topic.
I am nominating myself as the release manager for 4.9. Please feel free to
discuss if you have comments or concerns.
I will not be working alone, I will be assisted by Koushik Das and Patrick
Dube. I will be running point, but all three of us will be working
together as a unit for this release.
Our main focus for this release is the integration of hardware Continuous
Integration (CI) into the PR flow. Koushik and his team will be setting up
a CI environment which will be used for testing PRs and I will also be
setting up a CI environment for testing PRs.
The details of the CI integration will be handled publicly, but we will
likely have to work with a minimum viable implementation initially and move
forward from there. Here are some of the key aspects of the CI which are
top of mind for me.
- Standardize a feedback mechanism to post the result of CI runs back to
the relevant PR. I believe the best way to do this would be to post a
summary of the CI run in the PR thread on Github. With the existing
integration, this will then get pushed to the mailing list (since all
comments on a PR are pushed to the mailing list).
- Ideally, we will also make the CI logs available for the run. We are
still working out the details of how we do this, but we will likely be
pushing the logs to an object store with a cleanup window to remove the
logs after a set period of time (probably a week). This should give people
the opportunity to pull the logs if they are interested in the test
results, but will reduce the need for ever growing storage.
- In order to parallelize the CI operations, we will not be automatically
kicking off a CI run for every PR for now. Instead, we will communicate
between us and each run distinct PRs so we can maximize the utilization of
our hardware.
Some longer term goals of the CI in my mind are as follows:
- I would like the core CI framework to be easily distributed and
accessible to anyone who has hardware available. This would enable anyone
to setup a CI on their hardware and it would automatically be hooked up to
feedback the results to the Github PRs. I feel this is very important long
term because every individual or organization depends on a different
configuration and hardware setup, so it empowers them to validate their own
use case while adding value back to the community.
Additional details will follow, namely the release schedule etc.
Please contribute your ideas and feedback.
Cheers,
Will
DISCLAIMER
==========
This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information which is the property of Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business. It is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, retain, copy, print, distribute or use this message. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender and delete all copies of this message. Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business does not accept any liability for virus infected mails.
Re: 4.9 Release Management
Posted by Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>.
Thanks Simon. :)
*Will STEVENS*
Lead Developer
*CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:14 PM, Simon Weller <sw...@ena.com> wrote:
> Will,
>
> You have our support!
>
> Let us know what we can do to help.
>
> - Si
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Paul Angus <pa...@shapeblue.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 3:09 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: 4.9 Release Management
>
> That's good enough for me (tm). you're figuring out what you need to
> figure out. I know the feeling. :)
>
> We probably need to have a concensus around release cadence and stick to
> it for a while. Otherwise we're going to lose some credibility as project.
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>
> Sent: 2 Mar 2016 20:46
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: 4.9 Release Management
>
> I don't think I can answer that at this time. My personal opinion is that
> CI is more important than the release timeline, but others may not share
> this opinion (as it is only my opinion). I am full steam ahead trying to
> review what we have in place and the work that different parties have done
> on CI to date. I am hoping to have a CI implementation setup in my
> environment soon, which will enable me to better assess the current state
> of affairs.
>
> There are a lot of moving parts involved and I will be the first to admit
> that I don't have a firm grasp on everything yet, so reviewing our Marvin
> test coverage and output is something I have not yet had a chance to
> tackle.
>
> Does that answer your question well enough? :)
>
> *Will STEVENS*
> Lead Developer
>
> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
> w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_
>
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Paul Angus <pa...@shapeblue.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for taking up the baton Will et al.
> >
> > Just for clarity - given that getting CI 'done' will take some time
> > (mainly because of the state of the Marvin Tests and Marvin output) - are
> > 'we' now dropping the monthly releases?
> >
> >
> > [image: ShapeBlue] <http://www.shapeblue.com>
> > Paul Angus
> > VP Technology , ShapeBlue
> > d: *+44 203 617 0528 | s: +44 203 603 0540*
> > <+44%20203%20617%200528%20%7C%20s:%20+44%20203%20603%200540> | m:
> > *+44 7711 418784* <+44%207711%20418784>
> > e: *paul.angus@shapeblue.com | t: @cloudyangus*
> > <pa...@cloudyangus> | w:
> > *www.shapeblue.com* <http://www.shapeblue.com>
> > a: 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden London WC2N 4HS UK
> > 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.
> > 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.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Paul Angus
> VP Technology , ShapeBlue
>
>
> t: @cloudyangus<te...@cloudyangus>
>
> e: paul.angus@shapeblue.com<ma...@shapeblue.com>
> | w: www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> > From: Will Stevens [mailto:williamstevens@gmail.com]
> > Sent: 02 March 2016 17:15
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: 4.9 Release Management
> >
> > Hello Everyone,
> > I have mentioned this in other related threads, but I wanted to make an
> > official thread on the topic.
> >
> > I am nominating myself as the release manager for 4.9. Please feel free
> to
> > discuss if you have comments or concerns.
> >
> > I will not be working alone, I will be assisted by Koushik Das and
> Patrick
> > Dube. I will be running point, but all three of us will be working
> together
> > as a unit for this release.
> >
> > Our main focus for this release is the integration of hardware Continuous
> > Integration (CI) into the PR flow. Koushik and his team will be setting
> up
> > a CI environment which will be used for testing PRs and I will also be
> > setting up a CI environment for testing PRs.
> >
> > The details of the CI integration will be handled publicly, but we will
> > likely have to work with a minimum viable implementation initially and
> move
> > forward from there. Here are some of the key aspects of the CI which are
> > top of mind for me.
> >
> > - Standardize a feedback mechanism to post the result of CI runs back to
> > the relevant PR. I believe the best way to do this would be to post a
> > summary of the CI run in the PR thread on Github. With the existing
> > integration, this will then get pushed to the mailing list (since all
> > comments on a PR are pushed to the mailing list).
> > - Ideally, we will also make the CI logs available for the run. We are
> > still working out the details of how we do this, but we will likely be
> > pushing the logs to an object store with a cleanup window to remove the
> > logs after a set period of time (probably a week). This should give
> people
> > the opportunity to pull the logs if they are interested in the test
> > results, but will reduce the need for ever growing storage.
> > - In order to parallelize the CI operations, we will not be automatically
> > kicking off a CI run for every PR for now. Instead, we will communicate
> > between us and each run distinct PRs so we can maximize the utilization
> of
> > our hardware.
> >
> > Some longer term goals of the CI in my mind are as follows:
> >
> > - I would like the core CI framework to be easily distributed and
> > accessible to anyone who has hardware available. This would enable anyone
> > to setup a CI on their hardware and it would automatically be hooked up
> to
> > feedback the results to the Github PRs. I feel this is very important
> long
> > term because every individual or organization depends on a different
> > configuration and hardware setup, so it empowers them to validate their
> own
> > use case while adding value back to the community.
> >
> > Additional details will follow, namely the release schedule etc.
> >
> > Please contribute your ideas and feedback.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Will
> > 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/>
> >
> 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/>
>
Re: 4.9 Release Management
Posted by Simon Weller <sw...@ena.com>.
Will,
You have our support!
Let us know what we can do to help.
- Si
________________________________________
From: Paul Angus <pa...@shapeblue.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 3:09 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: 4.9 Release Management
That's good enough for me (tm). you're figuring out what you need to figure out. I know the feeling. :)
We probably need to have a concensus around release cadence and stick to it for a while. Otherwise we're going to lose some credibility as project.
From: Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>
Sent: 2 Mar 2016 20:46
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: 4.9 Release Management
I don't think I can answer that at this time. My personal opinion is that
CI is more important than the release timeline, but others may not share
this opinion (as it is only my opinion). I am full steam ahead trying to
review what we have in place and the work that different parties have done
on CI to date. I am hoping to have a CI implementation setup in my
environment soon, which will enable me to better assess the current state
of affairs.
There are a lot of moving parts involved and I will be the first to admit
that I don't have a firm grasp on everything yet, so reviewing our Marvin
test coverage and output is something I have not yet had a chance to tackle.
Does that answer your question well enough? :)
*Will STEVENS*
Lead Developer
*CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Paul Angus <pa...@shapeblue.com>
wrote:
> Thanks for taking up the baton Will et al.
>
> Just for clarity - given that getting CI 'done' will take some time
> (mainly because of the state of the Marvin Tests and Marvin output) - are
> 'we' now dropping the monthly releases?
>
>
> [image: ShapeBlue] <http://www.shapeblue.com>
> Paul Angus
> VP Technology , ShapeBlue
> d: *+44 203 617 0528 | s: +44 203 603 0540*
> <+44%20203%20617%200528%20%7C%20s:%20+44%20203%20603%200540> | m:
> *+44 7711 418784* <+44%207711%20418784>
> e: *paul.angus@shapeblue.com | t: @cloudyangus*
> <pa...@cloudyangus> | w:
> *www.shapeblue.com* <http://www.shapeblue.com>
> a: 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden London WC2N 4HS UK
> 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.
> 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.
>
>
>
Paul Angus
VP Technology , ShapeBlue
t: @cloudyangus<te...@cloudyangus>
e: paul.angus@shapeblue.com<ma...@shapeblue.com> | w: www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com>
-----Original Message-----
> From: Will Stevens [mailto:williamstevens@gmail.com]
> Sent: 02 March 2016 17:15
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: 4.9 Release Management
>
> Hello Everyone,
> I have mentioned this in other related threads, but I wanted to make an
> official thread on the topic.
>
> I am nominating myself as the release manager for 4.9. Please feel free to
> discuss if you have comments or concerns.
>
> I will not be working alone, I will be assisted by Koushik Das and Patrick
> Dube. I will be running point, but all three of us will be working together
> as a unit for this release.
>
> Our main focus for this release is the integration of hardware Continuous
> Integration (CI) into the PR flow. Koushik and his team will be setting up
> a CI environment which will be used for testing PRs and I will also be
> setting up a CI environment for testing PRs.
>
> The details of the CI integration will be handled publicly, but we will
> likely have to work with a minimum viable implementation initially and move
> forward from there. Here are some of the key aspects of the CI which are
> top of mind for me.
>
> - Standardize a feedback mechanism to post the result of CI runs back to
> the relevant PR. I believe the best way to do this would be to post a
> summary of the CI run in the PR thread on Github. With the existing
> integration, this will then get pushed to the mailing list (since all
> comments on a PR are pushed to the mailing list).
> - Ideally, we will also make the CI logs available for the run. We are
> still working out the details of how we do this, but we will likely be
> pushing the logs to an object store with a cleanup window to remove the
> logs after a set period of time (probably a week). This should give people
> the opportunity to pull the logs if they are interested in the test
> results, but will reduce the need for ever growing storage.
> - In order to parallelize the CI operations, we will not be automatically
> kicking off a CI run for every PR for now. Instead, we will communicate
> between us and each run distinct PRs so we can maximize the utilization of
> our hardware.
>
> Some longer term goals of the CI in my mind are as follows:
>
> - I would like the core CI framework to be easily distributed and
> accessible to anyone who has hardware available. This would enable anyone
> to setup a CI on their hardware and it would automatically be hooked up to
> feedback the results to the Github PRs. I feel this is very important long
> term because every individual or organization depends on a different
> configuration and hardware setup, so it empowers them to validate their own
> use case while adding value back to the community.
>
> Additional details will follow, namely the release schedule etc.
>
> Please contribute your ideas and feedback.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Will
> 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/>
>
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/>
Re: 4.9 Release Management
Posted by Ahmad Emneina <ae...@gmail.com>.
4.9 should only be released if it passes the CI tests... pardon the pun.
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 1:21 PM, Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com> wrote:
> Yes, I understand and agree with you. On the flip side, the lack of CI has
> been a thorn in our side for a long time and the increased cadence only
> adds to this problem, so I am trying to walk a thin line here.
>
> Personally, if CI is the only thing I can contribute to ACS as the 4.9 RM,
> I will be happy with that. It is a problem that has to be solved and
> someone has to own it.
>
> *Will STEVENS*
> Lead Developer
>
> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
> w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_
>
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:09 PM, Paul Angus <pa...@shapeblue.com>
> wrote:
>
> > That's good enough for me (tm). you're figuring out what you need to
> > figure out. I know the feeling. :)
> >
> > We probably need to have a concensus around release cadence and stick to
> > it for a while. Otherwise we're going to lose some credibility as
> project.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>
> > Sent: 2 Mar 2016 20:46
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: 4.9 Release Management
> >
> > I don't think I can answer that at this time. My personal opinion is
> that
> > CI is more important than the release timeline, but others may not share
> > this opinion (as it is only my opinion). I am full steam ahead trying
> to
> > review what we have in place and the work that different parties have
> done
> > on CI to date. I am hoping to have a CI implementation setup in my
> > environment soon, which will enable me to better assess the current state
> > of affairs.
> >
> > There are a lot of moving parts involved and I will be the first to admit
> > that I don't have a firm grasp on everything yet, so reviewing our Marvin
> > test coverage and output is something I have not yet had a chance to
> > tackle.
> >
> > Does that answer your question well enough? :)
> >
> > *Will STEVENS*
> > Lead Developer
> >
> > *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
> > 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
> > w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Paul Angus <pa...@shapeblue.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks for taking up the baton Will et al.
> > >
> > > Just for clarity - given that getting CI 'done' will take some time
> > > (mainly because of the state of the Marvin Tests and Marvin output) -
> are
> > > 'we' now dropping the monthly releases?
> > >
> > >
> > > [image: ShapeBlue] <http://www.shapeblue.com>
> > > Paul Angus
> > > VP Technology , ShapeBlue
> > > d: *+44 203 617 0528 | s: +44 203 603 0540*
> > > <+44%20203%20617%200528%20%7C%20s:%20+44%20203%20603%200540> | m:
> > > *+44 7711 418784* <+44%207711%20418784>
> > > e: *paul.angus@shapeblue.com | t: @cloudyangus*
> > > <pa...@cloudyangus> | w:
> > > *www.shapeblue.com* <http://www.shapeblue.com>
> > > a: 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden London WC2N 4HS UK
> > > 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.
> > > 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.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > Paul Angus
> > VP Technology , ShapeBlue
> >
> >
> > t: @cloudyangus<te...@cloudyangus>
> >
> > e: paul.angus@shapeblue.com<ma...@shapeblue.com>
> > | w: www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Will Stevens [mailto:williamstevens@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: 02 March 2016 17:15
> > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > > Subject: 4.9 Release Management
> > >
> > > Hello Everyone,
> > > I have mentioned this in other related threads, but I wanted to make an
> > > official thread on the topic.
> > >
> > > I am nominating myself as the release manager for 4.9. Please feel free
> > to
> > > discuss if you have comments or concerns.
> > >
> > > I will not be working alone, I will be assisted by Koushik Das and
> > Patrick
> > > Dube. I will be running point, but all three of us will be working
> > together
> > > as a unit for this release.
> > >
> > > Our main focus for this release is the integration of hardware
> Continuous
> > > Integration (CI) into the PR flow. Koushik and his team will be setting
> > up
> > > a CI environment which will be used for testing PRs and I will also be
> > > setting up a CI environment for testing PRs.
> > >
> > > The details of the CI integration will be handled publicly, but we will
> > > likely have to work with a minimum viable implementation initially and
> > move
> > > forward from there. Here are some of the key aspects of the CI which
> are
> > > top of mind for me.
> > >
> > > - Standardize a feedback mechanism to post the result of CI runs back
> to
> > > the relevant PR. I believe the best way to do this would be to post a
> > > summary of the CI run in the PR thread on Github. With the existing
> > > integration, this will then get pushed to the mailing list (since all
> > > comments on a PR are pushed to the mailing list).
> > > - Ideally, we will also make the CI logs available for the run. We are
> > > still working out the details of how we do this, but we will likely be
> > > pushing the logs to an object store with a cleanup window to remove the
> > > logs after a set period of time (probably a week). This should give
> > people
> > > the opportunity to pull the logs if they are interested in the test
> > > results, but will reduce the need for ever growing storage.
> > > - In order to parallelize the CI operations, we will not be
> automatically
> > > kicking off a CI run for every PR for now. Instead, we will communicate
> > > between us and each run distinct PRs so we can maximize the utilization
> > of
> > > our hardware.
> > >
> > > Some longer term goals of the CI in my mind are as follows:
> > >
> > > - I would like the core CI framework to be easily distributed and
> > > accessible to anyone who has hardware available. This would enable
> anyone
> > > to setup a CI on their hardware and it would automatically be hooked up
> > to
> > > feedback the results to the Github PRs. I feel this is very important
> > long
> > > term because every individual or organization depends on a different
> > > configuration and hardware setup, so it empowers them to validate their
> > own
> > > use case while adding value back to the community.
> > >
> > > Additional details will follow, namely the release schedule etc.
> > >
> > > Please contribute your ideas and feedback.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Will
> > > 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/>
> > >
> > 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/>
> >
>
Re: 4.9 Release Management
Posted by Sebastien Goasguen <ru...@gmail.com>.
> On Mar 2, 2016, at 10:21 PM, Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com> wrote:
>
> Yes, I understand and agree with you. On the flip side, the lack of CI has
> been a thorn in our side for a long time and the increased cadence only
> adds to this problem, so I am trying to walk a thin line here.
>
> Personally, if CI is the only thing I can contribute to ACS as the 4.9 RM,
> I will be happy with that. It is a problem that has to be solved and
> someone has to own it.
100% agree, and I am glad you are stepping up.
-sebastien
>
> *Will STEVENS*
> Lead Developer
>
> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
> w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_
>
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:09 PM, Paul Angus <pa...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
>
>> That's good enough for me (tm). you're figuring out what you need to
>> figure out. I know the feeling. :)
>>
>> We probably need to have a concensus around release cadence and stick to
>> it for a while. Otherwise we're going to lose some credibility as project.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>
>> Sent: 2 Mar 2016 20:46
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: 4.9 Release Management
>>
>> I don't think I can answer that at this time. My personal opinion is that
>> CI is more important than the release timeline, but others may not share
>> this opinion (as it is only my opinion). I am full steam ahead trying to
>> review what we have in place and the work that different parties have done
>> on CI to date. I am hoping to have a CI implementation setup in my
>> environment soon, which will enable me to better assess the current state
>> of affairs.
>>
>> There are a lot of moving parts involved and I will be the first to admit
>> that I don't have a firm grasp on everything yet, so reviewing our Marvin
>> test coverage and output is something I have not yet had a chance to
>> tackle.
>>
>> Does that answer your question well enough? :)
>>
>> *Will STEVENS*
>> Lead Developer
>>
>> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
>> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
>> w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Paul Angus <pa...@shapeblue.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for taking up the baton Will et al.
>>>
>>> Just for clarity - given that getting CI 'done' will take some time
>>> (mainly because of the state of the Marvin Tests and Marvin output) - are
>>> 'we' now dropping the monthly releases?
>>>
>>>
>>> [image: ShapeBlue] <http://www.shapeblue.com>
>>> Paul Angus
>>> VP Technology , ShapeBlue
>>> d: *+44 203 617 0528 | s: +44 203 603 0540*
>>> <+44%20203%20617%200528%20%7C%20s:%20+44%20203%20603%200540> | m:
>>> *+44 7711 418784* <+44%207711%20418784>
>>> e: *paul.angus@shapeblue.com | t: @cloudyangus*
>>> <pa...@cloudyangus> | w:
>>> *www.shapeblue.com* <http://www.shapeblue.com>
>>> a: 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden London WC2N 4HS UK
>>> 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.
>>> 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.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Paul Angus
>> VP Technology , ShapeBlue
>>
>>
>> t: @cloudyangus<te...@cloudyangus>
>>
>> e: paul.angus@shapeblue.com<ma...@shapeblue.com>
>> | w: www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Will Stevens [mailto:williamstevens@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: 02 March 2016 17:15
>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>>> Subject: 4.9 Release Management
>>>
>>> Hello Everyone,
>>> I have mentioned this in other related threads, but I wanted to make an
>>> official thread on the topic.
>>>
>>> I am nominating myself as the release manager for 4.9. Please feel free
>> to
>>> discuss if you have comments or concerns.
>>>
>>> I will not be working alone, I will be assisted by Koushik Das and
>> Patrick
>>> Dube. I will be running point, but all three of us will be working
>> together
>>> as a unit for this release.
>>>
>>> Our main focus for this release is the integration of hardware Continuous
>>> Integration (CI) into the PR flow. Koushik and his team will be setting
>> up
>>> a CI environment which will be used for testing PRs and I will also be
>>> setting up a CI environment for testing PRs.
>>>
>>> The details of the CI integration will be handled publicly, but we will
>>> likely have to work with a minimum viable implementation initially and
>> move
>>> forward from there. Here are some of the key aspects of the CI which are
>>> top of mind for me.
>>>
>>> - Standardize a feedback mechanism to post the result of CI runs back to
>>> the relevant PR. I believe the best way to do this would be to post a
>>> summary of the CI run in the PR thread on Github. With the existing
>>> integration, this will then get pushed to the mailing list (since all
>>> comments on a PR are pushed to the mailing list).
>>> - Ideally, we will also make the CI logs available for the run. We are
>>> still working out the details of how we do this, but we will likely be
>>> pushing the logs to an object store with a cleanup window to remove the
>>> logs after a set period of time (probably a week). This should give
>> people
>>> the opportunity to pull the logs if they are interested in the test
>>> results, but will reduce the need for ever growing storage.
>>> - In order to parallelize the CI operations, we will not be automatically
>>> kicking off a CI run for every PR for now. Instead, we will communicate
>>> between us and each run distinct PRs so we can maximize the utilization
>> of
>>> our hardware.
>>>
>>> Some longer term goals of the CI in my mind are as follows:
>>>
>>> - I would like the core CI framework to be easily distributed and
>>> accessible to anyone who has hardware available. This would enable anyone
>>> to setup a CI on their hardware and it would automatically be hooked up
>> to
>>> feedback the results to the Github PRs. I feel this is very important
>> long
>>> term because every individual or organization depends on a different
>>> configuration and hardware setup, so it empowers them to validate their
>> own
>>> use case while adding value back to the community.
>>>
>>> Additional details will follow, namely the release schedule etc.
>>>
>>> Please contribute your ideas and feedback.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Will
>>> 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/>
>>>
>> 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/>
>>
Re: 4.9 Release Management
Posted by Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>.
Yes, I understand and agree with you. On the flip side, the lack of CI has
been a thorn in our side for a long time and the increased cadence only
adds to this problem, so I am trying to walk a thin line here.
Personally, if CI is the only thing I can contribute to ACS as the 4.9 RM,
I will be happy with that. It is a problem that has to be solved and
someone has to own it.
*Will STEVENS*
Lead Developer
*CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:09 PM, Paul Angus <pa...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
> That's good enough for me (tm). you're figuring out what you need to
> figure out. I know the feeling. :)
>
> We probably need to have a concensus around release cadence and stick to
> it for a while. Otherwise we're going to lose some credibility as project.
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>
> Sent: 2 Mar 2016 20:46
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: 4.9 Release Management
>
> I don't think I can answer that at this time. My personal opinion is that
> CI is more important than the release timeline, but others may not share
> this opinion (as it is only my opinion). I am full steam ahead trying to
> review what we have in place and the work that different parties have done
> on CI to date. I am hoping to have a CI implementation setup in my
> environment soon, which will enable me to better assess the current state
> of affairs.
>
> There are a lot of moving parts involved and I will be the first to admit
> that I don't have a firm grasp on everything yet, so reviewing our Marvin
> test coverage and output is something I have not yet had a chance to
> tackle.
>
> Does that answer your question well enough? :)
>
> *Will STEVENS*
> Lead Developer
>
> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
> w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_
>
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Paul Angus <pa...@shapeblue.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for taking up the baton Will et al.
> >
> > Just for clarity - given that getting CI 'done' will take some time
> > (mainly because of the state of the Marvin Tests and Marvin output) - are
> > 'we' now dropping the monthly releases?
> >
> >
> > [image: ShapeBlue] <http://www.shapeblue.com>
> > Paul Angus
> > VP Technology , ShapeBlue
> > d: *+44 203 617 0528 | s: +44 203 603 0540*
> > <+44%20203%20617%200528%20%7C%20s:%20+44%20203%20603%200540> | m:
> > *+44 7711 418784* <+44%207711%20418784>
> > e: *paul.angus@shapeblue.com | t: @cloudyangus*
> > <pa...@cloudyangus> | w:
> > *www.shapeblue.com* <http://www.shapeblue.com>
> > a: 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden London WC2N 4HS UK
> > 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.
> > 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.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Paul Angus
> VP Technology , ShapeBlue
>
>
> t: @cloudyangus<te...@cloudyangus>
>
> e: paul.angus@shapeblue.com<ma...@shapeblue.com>
> | w: www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> > From: Will Stevens [mailto:williamstevens@gmail.com]
> > Sent: 02 March 2016 17:15
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: 4.9 Release Management
> >
> > Hello Everyone,
> > I have mentioned this in other related threads, but I wanted to make an
> > official thread on the topic.
> >
> > I am nominating myself as the release manager for 4.9. Please feel free
> to
> > discuss if you have comments or concerns.
> >
> > I will not be working alone, I will be assisted by Koushik Das and
> Patrick
> > Dube. I will be running point, but all three of us will be working
> together
> > as a unit for this release.
> >
> > Our main focus for this release is the integration of hardware Continuous
> > Integration (CI) into the PR flow. Koushik and his team will be setting
> up
> > a CI environment which will be used for testing PRs and I will also be
> > setting up a CI environment for testing PRs.
> >
> > The details of the CI integration will be handled publicly, but we will
> > likely have to work with a minimum viable implementation initially and
> move
> > forward from there. Here are some of the key aspects of the CI which are
> > top of mind for me.
> >
> > - Standardize a feedback mechanism to post the result of CI runs back to
> > the relevant PR. I believe the best way to do this would be to post a
> > summary of the CI run in the PR thread on Github. With the existing
> > integration, this will then get pushed to the mailing list (since all
> > comments on a PR are pushed to the mailing list).
> > - Ideally, we will also make the CI logs available for the run. We are
> > still working out the details of how we do this, but we will likely be
> > pushing the logs to an object store with a cleanup window to remove the
> > logs after a set period of time (probably a week). This should give
> people
> > the opportunity to pull the logs if they are interested in the test
> > results, but will reduce the need for ever growing storage.
> > - In order to parallelize the CI operations, we will not be automatically
> > kicking off a CI run for every PR for now. Instead, we will communicate
> > between us and each run distinct PRs so we can maximize the utilization
> of
> > our hardware.
> >
> > Some longer term goals of the CI in my mind are as follows:
> >
> > - I would like the core CI framework to be easily distributed and
> > accessible to anyone who has hardware available. This would enable anyone
> > to setup a CI on their hardware and it would automatically be hooked up
> to
> > feedback the results to the Github PRs. I feel this is very important
> long
> > term because every individual or organization depends on a different
> > configuration and hardware setup, so it empowers them to validate their
> own
> > use case while adding value back to the community.
> >
> > Additional details will follow, namely the release schedule etc.
> >
> > Please contribute your ideas and feedback.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Will
> > 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/>
> >
> 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/>
>
Re: 4.9 Release Management
Posted by Paul Angus <pa...@shapeblue.com>.
That's good enough for me (tm). you're figuring out what you need to figure out. I know the feeling. :)
We probably need to have a concensus around release cadence and stick to it for a while. Otherwise we're going to lose some credibility as project.
From: Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>
Sent: 2 Mar 2016 20:46
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: 4.9 Release Management
I don't think I can answer that at this time. My personal opinion is that
CI is more important than the release timeline, but others may not share
this opinion (as it is only my opinion). I am full steam ahead trying to
review what we have in place and the work that different parties have done
on CI to date. I am hoping to have a CI implementation setup in my
environment soon, which will enable me to better assess the current state
of affairs.
There are a lot of moving parts involved and I will be the first to admit
that I don't have a firm grasp on everything yet, so reviewing our Marvin
test coverage and output is something I have not yet had a chance to tackle.
Does that answer your question well enough? :)
*Will STEVENS*
Lead Developer
*CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Paul Angus <pa...@shapeblue.com>
wrote:
> Thanks for taking up the baton Will et al.
>
> Just for clarity - given that getting CI 'done' will take some time
> (mainly because of the state of the Marvin Tests and Marvin output) - are
> 'we' now dropping the monthly releases?
>
>
> [image: ShapeBlue] <http://www.shapeblue.com>
> Paul Angus
> VP Technology , ShapeBlue
> d: *+44 203 617 0528 | s: +44 203 603 0540*
> <+44%20203%20617%200528%20%7C%20s:%20+44%20203%20603%200540> | m:
> *+44 7711 418784* <+44%207711%20418784>
> e: *paul.angus@shapeblue.com | t: @cloudyangus*
> <pa...@cloudyangus> | w:
> *www.shapeblue.com* <http://www.shapeblue.com>
> a: 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden London WC2N 4HS UK
> 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.
> 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.
>
>
>
Paul Angus
VP Technology , ShapeBlue
t: @cloudyangus<te...@cloudyangus>
e: paul.angus@shapeblue.com<ma...@shapeblue.com> | w: www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com>
-----Original Message-----
> From: Will Stevens [mailto:williamstevens@gmail.com]
> Sent: 02 March 2016 17:15
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: 4.9 Release Management
>
> Hello Everyone,
> I have mentioned this in other related threads, but I wanted to make an
> official thread on the topic.
>
> I am nominating myself as the release manager for 4.9. Please feel free to
> discuss if you have comments or concerns.
>
> I will not be working alone, I will be assisted by Koushik Das and Patrick
> Dube. I will be running point, but all three of us will be working together
> as a unit for this release.
>
> Our main focus for this release is the integration of hardware Continuous
> Integration (CI) into the PR flow. Koushik and his team will be setting up
> a CI environment which will be used for testing PRs and I will also be
> setting up a CI environment for testing PRs.
>
> The details of the CI integration will be handled publicly, but we will
> likely have to work with a minimum viable implementation initially and move
> forward from there. Here are some of the key aspects of the CI which are
> top of mind for me.
>
> - Standardize a feedback mechanism to post the result of CI runs back to
> the relevant PR. I believe the best way to do this would be to post a
> summary of the CI run in the PR thread on Github. With the existing
> integration, this will then get pushed to the mailing list (since all
> comments on a PR are pushed to the mailing list).
> - Ideally, we will also make the CI logs available for the run. We are
> still working out the details of how we do this, but we will likely be
> pushing the logs to an object store with a cleanup window to remove the
> logs after a set period of time (probably a week). This should give people
> the opportunity to pull the logs if they are interested in the test
> results, but will reduce the need for ever growing storage.
> - In order to parallelize the CI operations, we will not be automatically
> kicking off a CI run for every PR for now. Instead, we will communicate
> between us and each run distinct PRs so we can maximize the utilization of
> our hardware.
>
> Some longer term goals of the CI in my mind are as follows:
>
> - I would like the core CI framework to be easily distributed and
> accessible to anyone who has hardware available. This would enable anyone
> to setup a CI on their hardware and it would automatically be hooked up to
> feedback the results to the Github PRs. I feel this is very important long
> term because every individual or organization depends on a different
> configuration and hardware setup, so it empowers them to validate their own
> use case while adding value back to the community.
>
> Additional details will follow, namely the release schedule etc.
>
> Please contribute your ideas and feedback.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Will
> 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/>
>
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/>
Re: 4.9 Release Management
Posted by Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>.
I don't think I can answer that at this time. My personal opinion is that
CI is more important than the release timeline, but others may not share
this opinion (as it is only my opinion). I am full steam ahead trying to
review what we have in place and the work that different parties have done
on CI to date. I am hoping to have a CI implementation setup in my
environment soon, which will enable me to better assess the current state
of affairs.
There are a lot of moving parts involved and I will be the first to admit
that I don't have a firm grasp on everything yet, so reviewing our Marvin
test coverage and output is something I have not yet had a chance to tackle.
Does that answer your question well enough? :)
*Will STEVENS*
Lead Developer
*CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Paul Angus <pa...@shapeblue.com>
wrote:
> Thanks for taking up the baton Will et al.
>
> Just for clarity - given that getting CI 'done' will take some time
> (mainly because of the state of the Marvin Tests and Marvin output) - are
> 'we' now dropping the monthly releases?
>
>
> [image: ShapeBlue] <http://www.shapeblue.com>
> Paul Angus
> VP Technology , ShapeBlue
> d: *+44 203 617 0528 | s: +44 203 603 0540*
> <+44%20203%20617%200528%20%7C%20s:%20+44%20203%20603%200540> | m:
> *+44 7711 418784* <+44%207711%20418784>
> e: *paul.angus@shapeblue.com | t: @cloudyangus*
> <pa...@cloudyangus> | w:
> *www.shapeblue.com* <http://www.shapeblue.com>
> a: 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden London WC2N 4HS UK
> 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.
> 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.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Will Stevens [mailto:williamstevens@gmail.com]
> Sent: 02 March 2016 17:15
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: 4.9 Release Management
>
> Hello Everyone,
> I have mentioned this in other related threads, but I wanted to make an
> official thread on the topic.
>
> I am nominating myself as the release manager for 4.9. Please feel free to
> discuss if you have comments or concerns.
>
> I will not be working alone, I will be assisted by Koushik Das and Patrick
> Dube. I will be running point, but all three of us will be working together
> as a unit for this release.
>
> Our main focus for this release is the integration of hardware Continuous
> Integration (CI) into the PR flow. Koushik and his team will be setting up
> a CI environment which will be used for testing PRs and I will also be
> setting up a CI environment for testing PRs.
>
> The details of the CI integration will be handled publicly, but we will
> likely have to work with a minimum viable implementation initially and move
> forward from there. Here are some of the key aspects of the CI which are
> top of mind for me.
>
> - Standardize a feedback mechanism to post the result of CI runs back to
> the relevant PR. I believe the best way to do this would be to post a
> summary of the CI run in the PR thread on Github. With the existing
> integration, this will then get pushed to the mailing list (since all
> comments on a PR are pushed to the mailing list).
> - Ideally, we will also make the CI logs available for the run. We are
> still working out the details of how we do this, but we will likely be
> pushing the logs to an object store with a cleanup window to remove the
> logs after a set period of time (probably a week). This should give people
> the opportunity to pull the logs if they are interested in the test
> results, but will reduce the need for ever growing storage.
> - In order to parallelize the CI operations, we will not be automatically
> kicking off a CI run for every PR for now. Instead, we will communicate
> between us and each run distinct PRs so we can maximize the utilization of
> our hardware.
>
> Some longer term goals of the CI in my mind are as follows:
>
> - I would like the core CI framework to be easily distributed and
> accessible to anyone who has hardware available. This would enable anyone
> to setup a CI on their hardware and it would automatically be hooked up to
> feedback the results to the Github PRs. I feel this is very important long
> term because every individual or organization depends on a different
> configuration and hardware setup, so it empowers them to validate their own
> use case while adding value back to the community.
>
> Additional details will follow, namely the release schedule etc.
>
> Please contribute your ideas and feedback.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Will
> 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/>
>
RE: 4.9 Release Management
Posted by Paul Angus <pa...@shapeblue.com>.
Thanks for taking up the baton Will et al.
Just for clarity - given that getting CI 'done' will take some time (mainly because of the state of the Marvin Tests and Marvin output) - are 'we' now dropping the monthly releases?
[ShapeBlue]<http://www.shapeblue.com>
Paul Angus
VP Technology , ShapeBlue
d: +44 203 617 0528 | s: +44 203 603 0540<tel:+44%20203%20617%200528%20|%20s:%20+44%20203%20603%200540> | m: +44 7711 418784<tel:+44%207711%20418784>
e: paul.angus@shapeblue.com | t: @cloudyangus<ma...@cloudyangus> | w: www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com>
a: 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden London WC2N 4HS UK
[cid:image1c9d01.png@0dd3a650.4f94077d]
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.
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.
-----Original Message-----
From: Will Stevens [mailto:williamstevens@gmail.com]
Sent: 02 March 2016 17:15
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: 4.9 Release Management
Hello Everyone,
I have mentioned this in other related threads, but I wanted to make an official thread on the topic.
I am nominating myself as the release manager for 4.9. Please feel free to discuss if you have comments or concerns.
I will not be working alone, I will be assisted by Koushik Das and Patrick Dube. I will be running point, but all three of us will be working together as a unit for this release.
Our main focus for this release is the integration of hardware Continuous Integration (CI) into the PR flow. Koushik and his team will be setting up a CI environment which will be used for testing PRs and I will also be setting up a CI environment for testing PRs.
The details of the CI integration will be handled publicly, but we will likely have to work with a minimum viable implementation initially and move forward from there. Here are some of the key aspects of the CI which are top of mind for me.
- Standardize a feedback mechanism to post the result of CI runs back to the relevant PR. I believe the best way to do this would be to post a summary of the CI run in the PR thread on Github. With the existing integration, this will then get pushed to the mailing list (since all comments on a PR are pushed to the mailing list).
- Ideally, we will also make the CI logs available for the run. We are still working out the details of how we do this, but we will likely be pushing the logs to an object store with a cleanup window to remove the logs after a set period of time (probably a week). This should give people the opportunity to pull the logs if they are interested in the test results, but will reduce the need for ever growing storage.
- In order to parallelize the CI operations, we will not be automatically kicking off a CI run for every PR for now. Instead, we will communicate between us and each run distinct PRs so we can maximize the utilization of our hardware.
Some longer term goals of the CI in my mind are as follows:
- I would like the core CI framework to be easily distributed and accessible to anyone who has hardware available. This would enable anyone to setup a CI on their hardware and it would automatically be hooked up to feedback the results to the Github PRs. I feel this is very important long term because every individual or organization depends on a different configuration and hardware setup, so it empowers them to validate their own use case while adding value back to the community.
Additional details will follow, namely the release schedule etc.
Please contribute your ideas and feedback.
Cheers,
Will
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/>
Re: 4.9 Release Management
Posted by ilya <il...@gmail.com>.
Will, Samir, Koushik and Patrick,
Thanks for your commitment and energy.
Regards
ilya
On 3/2/16 11:43 AM, Samir Agarwal wrote:
> Kudos Will!
>
> I had received many private notes wondering if Accelerite will continue to play a strong role in contributions to the community; here is your proof!
>
> We wanted to take on the biggest pain points in the community, and see how we can make positive contributions. Koushik Das will work alongside Will and Patrick to address both of these problem areas. I believe that this will put the community on a path to more manageable releases going forward.
>
> Best
>
> Samir
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Will Stevens [mailto:williamstevens@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2016 9:15 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: 4.9 Release Management
>
> Hello Everyone,
> I have mentioned this in other related threads, but I wanted to make an official thread on the topic.
>
> I am nominating myself as the release manager for 4.9. Please feel free to discuss if you have comments or concerns.
>
> I will not be working alone, I will be assisted by Koushik Das and Patrick Dube. I will be running point, but all three of us will be working together as a unit for this release.
>
> Our main focus for this release is the integration of hardware Continuous Integration (CI) into the PR flow. Koushik and his team will be setting up a CI environment which will be used for testing PRs and I will also be setting up a CI environment for testing PRs.
>
> The details of the CI integration will be handled publicly, but we will likely have to work with a minimum viable implementation initially and move forward from there. Here are some of the key aspects of the CI which are top of mind for me.
>
> - Standardize a feedback mechanism to post the result of CI runs back to the relevant PR. I believe the best way to do this would be to post a summary of the CI run in the PR thread on Github. With the existing integration, this will then get pushed to the mailing list (since all comments on a PR are pushed to the mailing list).
> - Ideally, we will also make the CI logs available for the run. We are still working out the details of how we do this, but we will likely be pushing the logs to an object store with a cleanup window to remove the logs after a set period of time (probably a week). This should give people the opportunity to pull the logs if they are interested in the test results, but will reduce the need for ever growing storage.
> - In order to parallelize the CI operations, we will not be automatically kicking off a CI run for every PR for now. Instead, we will communicate between us and each run distinct PRs so we can maximize the utilization of our hardware.
>
> Some longer term goals of the CI in my mind are as follows:
>
> - I would like the core CI framework to be easily distributed and accessible to anyone who has hardware available. This would enable anyone to setup a CI on their hardware and it would automatically be hooked up to feedback the results to the Github PRs. I feel this is very important long term because every individual or organization depends on a different configuration and hardware setup, so it empowers them to validate their own use case while adding value back to the community.
>
> Additional details will follow, namely the release schedule etc.
>
> Please contribute your ideas and feedback.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Will
>
>
>
> DISCLAIMER
> ==========
> This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information which is the property of Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business. It is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, retain, copy, print, distribute or use this message. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender and delete all copies of this message. Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business does not accept any liability for virus infected mails.
>
RE: 4.9 Release Management
Posted by Samir Agarwal <sa...@accelerite.com>.
Kudos Will!
I had received many private notes wondering if Accelerite will continue to play a strong role in contributions to the community; here is your proof!
We wanted to take on the biggest pain points in the community, and see how we can make positive contributions. Koushik Das will work alongside Will and Patrick to address both of these problem areas. I believe that this will put the community on a path to more manageable releases going forward.
Best
Samir
-----Original Message-----
From: Will Stevens [mailto:williamstevens@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2016 9:15 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: 4.9 Release Management
Hello Everyone,
I have mentioned this in other related threads, but I wanted to make an official thread on the topic.
I am nominating myself as the release manager for 4.9. Please feel free to discuss if you have comments or concerns.
I will not be working alone, I will be assisted by Koushik Das and Patrick Dube. I will be running point, but all three of us will be working together as a unit for this release.
Our main focus for this release is the integration of hardware Continuous Integration (CI) into the PR flow. Koushik and his team will be setting up a CI environment which will be used for testing PRs and I will also be setting up a CI environment for testing PRs.
The details of the CI integration will be handled publicly, but we will likely have to work with a minimum viable implementation initially and move forward from there. Here are some of the key aspects of the CI which are top of mind for me.
- Standardize a feedback mechanism to post the result of CI runs back to the relevant PR. I believe the best way to do this would be to post a summary of the CI run in the PR thread on Github. With the existing integration, this will then get pushed to the mailing list (since all comments on a PR are pushed to the mailing list).
- Ideally, we will also make the CI logs available for the run. We are still working out the details of how we do this, but we will likely be pushing the logs to an object store with a cleanup window to remove the logs after a set period of time (probably a week). This should give people the opportunity to pull the logs if they are interested in the test results, but will reduce the need for ever growing storage.
- In order to parallelize the CI operations, we will not be automatically kicking off a CI run for every PR for now. Instead, we will communicate between us and each run distinct PRs so we can maximize the utilization of our hardware.
Some longer term goals of the CI in my mind are as follows:
- I would like the core CI framework to be easily distributed and accessible to anyone who has hardware available. This would enable anyone to setup a CI on their hardware and it would automatically be hooked up to feedback the results to the Github PRs. I feel this is very important long term because every individual or organization depends on a different configuration and hardware setup, so it empowers them to validate their own use case while adding value back to the community.
Additional details will follow, namely the release schedule etc.
Please contribute your ideas and feedback.
Cheers,
Will
DISCLAIMER
==========
This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information which is the property of Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business. It is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, retain, copy, print, distribute or use this message. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender and delete all copies of this message. Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business does not accept any liability for virus infected mails.