Thanks for clarifying, Hugo! On Thursday, July 3, 2014, Hugo Trippaers <h...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
> Hey Mike, > > That is technically not the way this vote works. Release votes a a “Lazy > Majority” vote. This means that the vote requires at least 3 binding +1 > votes and more +1 votes than -1 votes. For the exact working see > paragraphs 3.4.4 and 3.2.2 of the Apache CloudStack bylaws. > > > > Cheers, > > Hugo > > > On 3 jul. 2014, at 02:13, Mike Tutkowski <mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > We have at least one binding -1, so this VOTE won't pass. > > > > We should continue to test on this RC, though, as Marcus mentioned, in an > > effort to reduce RC spin. > > > > We also shouldn't spin up a new RC until next week as many in the U.S. > are > > on a long weekend starting tomorrow. > > > > On Wednesday, July 2, 2014, Marcus <shadow...@gmail.com <javascript:;>> > wrote: > > > >> -1 > >> > >> I'm unable to add a KVM host. It seems to be related to changes in the > >> SshCmdHelper. The mgmt server issues an ssh check to see of the host has > >> kvm modules installed, which it shows it does, but there is a null > pointer > >> in the SshCmdHelper and it doesn't interpret the result correctly. I > saw > >> this once, over a month ago, and commented on CLOUDSTACK-6804. They say > the > >> null pointer is fixed in CLOUDSTACK-6844, but it looks like it was > >> committed in 4.4-forward and never pulled in to the release branch. > >> > >> I tested this release with > >> cherry-picking 2ec7359b4eb501b0d9e80ed87af7a54938e9d505 from > 4.4-forward. > >> It seems to work, though the fix seems a bit hacky (sleep loop for up to > >> 1s, waiting for null pointer to not be null), but perhaps I just don't > >> understand the problem well enough. In the interest of reducing RC > >> iterations, I went ahead and continued to test per the devcloud-kvm > docs. > >> So far everything looks good as far as basic deployment and built-in > >> storage types. > >> > >> * Launched VPC with a default-allow network and a default-deny network > >> * launched an nfs-based vm in default-deny and clvm based in > default-allow > >> with qcow2 template > >> * registered vmdk template for KVM, launched a vm based on it, for both > nfs > >> and lvm > >> * registered raw image template, launched one for nfs and lvm > >> * set up port forward for 22 on half of vms, static nat on the other > half, > >> verified default-allow/deny worked as needed > >> * updated acls to allow 22 into everything, logged in to all servers to > >> verify they deployed correctly > >> > >> I don't believe CLOUDSTACK-6036 should block this release, FWIW. First, > >> there's no indication from the bug that it still affects 4.4.0, second, > >> it's not a regression, third, it didn't block the 4.3 release either, > >> fourth, from the sound of it, the worst of the issue is that a vm is > >> inadvertently stopped if it previously had an issue stopping and upgrade > >> timing happens to be just right, with a fix of simply restarting the vm. > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Tomasz Zięba <t.a.zi...@gmail.com > <javascript:;> > >> <javascript:;>> wrote: > >> > >>> -1 because CLOUDSTACK-6036 > >>> > >>> > >>> 2014-07-02 22:18 GMT+02:00 Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com > <javascript:;> > >> <javascript:;>>: > >>> > >>>> Hi All, > >>>> > >>>> I've created a 4.4.0 release, with the following artifacts up for a > >> vote: > >>>> > >>>> Git Branch and Commit SH: > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.4-RC20140702T2107 > >>>> Commit: 379387961bd05d1f84fe2e9a1997e9ecdceef91a > >>>> > >>>> List of changes: > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > http://docs.cloudstack.apache.org/projects/cloudstack-release-notes/en/latest/ > >>>> > >>>> Source release (checksums and signatures are available at the same > >>>> location): > >>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/cloudstack/4.4.0/ > >>>> > >>>> PGP release keys (signed using 4096R/AA4736F3): > >>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/cloudstack/KEYS > >>>> > >>>> Vote will be open for 72 hours. > >>>> > >>>> For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to > >>>> indicate "(binding)" with their vote? > >>>> > >>>> [ ] +1 approve > >>>> [ ] +0 no opinion > >>>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why) > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> I will ad my key to the mentioned KEYS file as soon as possible, > >>>> -- > >>>> Daan > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Regards, > >>> Tomasz Zięba > >>> Twitter: @TZieba > >>> LinkedIn: pl.linkedin.com/pub/tomasz-zięba-ph-d/3b/7a8/ab6/ > <http://pl.linkedin.com/pub/tomasz-zi%C4%99ba-ph-d/3b/7a8/ab6/> > >> <http://pl.linkedin.com/pub/tomasz-zi%C4%99ba-ph-d/3b/7a8/ab6/> > >>> <http://pl.linkedin.com/pub/tomasz-zi%C4%99ba-ph-d/3b/7a8/ab6/> > >>> <http://pl.linkedin.com/pub/tomasz-zi%C4%99ba-ph-d/3b/7a8/ab6/> > >>> > >> > > > > > > -- > > *Mike Tutkowski* > > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* > > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com <javascript:;> > > o: 303.746.7302 > > Advancing the way the world uses the cloud > > <http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™* > > -- *Mike Tutkowski* *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com o: 303.746.7302 Advancing the way the world uses the cloud <http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™*
