Thanks Pranav! Anyone hosting the non-oss jar files? Those places should be updated with the latest NetScaler jar. Please let me know I can share the latest jar file.
The latest jar file will be compatible with the cloudstack supported NetScaler releases. -Vijay V. > -----Original Message----- > From: Pranav Saxena > Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 3:49 PM > To: [email protected] > Cc: David Nalley ([email protected]); Ram Ganesh; Vijay Venkatachalam > Subject: RE: Integrating autoscale branch to master?- Autoscale feature > merged with asf/master > > Hi , > > I have helped Vijay in merging the AutoScale code with asf/master branch > after David's approval . Vijay Venkatachalam , Jessica Wang , Brian Federle > and myself have been involved in writing the AutoScale code . Please let us > know in case there are any concerns. > > Vijay Venkatachalam will update the community more about merging of the > autoscale code with asf/master. > > Thanks & Regards, > Pranav > > -----Original Message----- > From: Vijay Venkatachalam [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 1:14 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: Integrating autoscale branch to master? > > > * When this merge happens, the default build will not require the the > > Netscaler libraries to successfully complete. > > If the above is indeed the case, I have no objections. > > That is right, no NetScaler jars required for the default oss build! > Final round of unit testing is getting done, will do the merge tomorrow. > > Thanks, > Vijay V. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: David Nalley [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 12:58 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: Integrating autoscale branch to master? > > > > On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 2:04 AM, Vijay Venkatachalam > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > My replies inline > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Vijay V. > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: David Nalley [mailto:[email protected]] > > >> Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 7:42 PM > > >> To: [email protected] > > >> Subject: Re: Integrating autoscale branch to master? > > >> > > >> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 11:54 AM, Vijay Venkatachalam > > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > Ok I will keep changes ready, and will merge once 4.0's news is > declared. > > >> > > > >> > -Vijay V. > > >> > > > >> > > >> Vijay, > > >> > > >> I haven't kept up with this recently so a couple of > questions/assumptions: > > >> > > >> 1. Autoscale code will require NetScaler libraries right? > > > > > > There are 2 parts to autoscale code. > > > A. AutoScale Manager and its services, > > > This is part of the core. And has no No Netscaler jar dependency; > > > This part is coded like any other NetworkServiceManager, meaning > > > any > > network > > > element can provide autoscale service. So this part does not have > > > compile > > time > > > dependency with NetScaler jar. > > > > > > If an autoscale provider (which is most likely already an LB > > > provider) does > > not exist > > > in that network an error is thrown at run time. > > > So for all oss builds (where Netscaler is not packaged and cannot be > added > > > to the infrastructure) we should get a run-time error when > > > configuring > > autoscale. > > > > > > B. NetScaler Element and Netscaler Resource (which is part of > > > non-oss > > build today) > > > has been enhanced to provide autoscale capability. Today only > > > NetScaler does this, in future any network element can he enhanced > > > to provide autoscale. This part already has NetScaler jar dependency > > > (and is considered non-oss today) and will continue to have > > > NetScaler > > > jar dependency. > > > > > > > > >> 2. Is autoscale functionality modular enough that we can turn > > >> building it on/off at will? > > > > > > > > > Short Answer, No. > > > Since AutoScale is like an addon to LB there are touch- points. For > > > example, when a LoadBalancerRule is deleted the AutoScale entities > > > created for it also should be deleted, hence the dependency. > > > Basically there is code in LB core to delete autoscale entities on > > > the loadbalancer rule's delete path. Hence Part (A.) could not be > modularized. > > Is there an alternative here? > > > > > > Also, in the UI autoscale will appear as part of LB to the user and > > > if he attempts to configure AutoScale in a network which does not > > > have > > NetScaler; he will get a run-time error. > > > > > >> 3. Has there been any change to the netscaler java library licensing? > > >> I know there was work underway, but I never heard about a conclusion. > > >> > > > > > > I am still chasing the legal team on this, but for the moment, we > > > should continue to treat NetScaler as non-oss. > > > > > >> --David > > > > > > Thanks for my reply. What I surmise from all of this is: > > * When this merge happens, the default build will not require the the > > Netscaler libraries to successfully complete. > > > > If the above is indeed the case, I have no objections. > > > > Thanks, > > > > --David
