-1 ... sorry guys, especially with Simon chiming in. I'd request f2c5b5fbfe45196dfad2821fca513ddd6efa25c9 be cherry-picked.
On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 1:47 AM, Sebastien Goasguen <run...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 (binding) > > followed the testing procedure > > On Sep 6, 2013, at 10:46 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi > <animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com> wrote: > >> >> >> Thanks >> Animesh >> >> On Sep 6, 2013, at 1:55 PM, "Chip Childers" <chip.child...@sungard.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 08:18:35PM +0000, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] >>>>> Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 10:21 AM >>>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org >>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round) >>>>> >>>>> Animesh, >>>>> >>>>> I'd ask that this vote stay open until EOD Monday. I've tested the >>>>> basic sig / artifact, but I want an opportunity to run it in an actual >>>>> environment before formally voting. >>>> [Animesh>] Sure I can keep the VOTE open until Monday. >>>>> >>>>> Also, there is an issue being raised by Marcus (that Edison was going to >>>>> look into) in another thread around the CPVM. Is this a blocker issue? >>>> [Animesh>]Edison is working on a fix and will put in 4.2-forward branch. I >>>> am not sure who else uses CLVM to access the broader impact, if it is >>>> Marcus and he is fine with using Edison's fix in his environment than not >>>> an issue. >>> >>> Ha... I thought it was around the cPvm, not cLvm. >>> >>> Anyway, I guess it's up to Marcus (and others) to vote accordingly WRT >>> there concern about this issue. >>> >>> Thanks for holding off until EOD Monday for me (and perhaps others) to >>> vote! >>> >>> -chip >> >> Of course more testing and feedback of RC is better >
