Hey, no body casted a -1!

I will probably not be testing in time and won't stop this release for that
reason. if it works for anyone it should go out. If it doesn't work for me
I'll call for a fix. The CCP issue, I didn't know about. I don't think we
should abandon CCP users so a repair script should be made and the upgrade
marked as no go in our matrix.

Op di 5 mei 2015 om 17:23 schreef Marcus <shadow...@gmail.com>:

> Oh, I didn't see a vote from you yet. I just wanted to get my opinion out.
> There are some pretty critical fixes shipping in this build (clustered mgmt
> server is broken in 4.5.0, for example), and I think we need to be more
> generous with shipping fixes in small doses rather than blocking on known
> or existing issues.
>
> On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 8:13 AM, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > sure, hence the -0
> >
> > Op di 5 mei 2015 om 17:03 schreef Marcus <shadow...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > This is the sort of thing that I'd personally not -1, unless we can
> prove
> > > that it's a regression. If the files were released in 4.5.0 and haven't
> > > been modified, I'd prefer to ship some bugfixes rather than trying to
> fix
> > > all known bugs before shipping.
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Rene, but it is a problem in the release. It sound very strange that
> it
> > > > would not have been caught in any of the 4.4 releases or in 4.5.0. I
> am
> > > > hesitant but a -1 is on the surface of my keyboard.
> > > >
> > > > Op di 5 mei 2015 om 13:03 schreef Rene Moser <m...@renemoser.net>:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi
> > > > >
> > > > > Tested an update from 4.2.1 to 4.5.1 which failed because of 2
> > > identical
> > > > > ALTER TABLE statements for cloud_usage in schema-421to430.sql and
> > > > > schema-430to440.sql
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/blob/4.5-RC20150504T1217/setup/db/db/schema-421to430.sql#L787
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/blob/4.5-RC20150504T1217/setup/db/db/schema-430to440.sql#L464
> > > > >
> > > > > Commenting it out in schema-430to440.sql fixed it the update. Not
> > > really
> > > > > sure if this would brake anything in other conditions.
> > > > >
> > > > > It is not really a problem of 4.5.1, so not vote against it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yours
> > > > > René
> > > > >
> > > > > On 04.05.2015 13:20, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I've created a 4.5.1 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/4.5
> > > > > > Commit: 0eb4eb23701f0c6fec8bd5461cd9aa9f92c9576d
> > > > > >
> > > > > > List of changes:
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES.md;hb=4.5
> > > > > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/commits/4.5-RC20150504T1217
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Source release (checksums and signatures are available at the
> same
> > > > > > location):
> > > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/cloudstack/4.5.1/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > PGP release keys (signed using 0EE3D884):
> > > > > > 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)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For convenience of testing, you may use the following
> repositories
> > > and
> > > > > > location to download systemvm templates:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://packages.shapeblue.com/cloudstack/testing/
> > > > > > http://packages.shapeblue.com/systemvmtemplate/4.5/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to