Thank you gentlemen. I have been following the 1608 PR from afar and I will review your list Wido. I will get my CI chugging with some of those PRs today.
Thx, *Will STEVENS* Lead Developer *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 1:07 PM, Wido den Hollander <w...@widodh.nl> wrote: > Hi Will, > > These are on my list: > > - https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1610 > - https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1480 > - https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1608 > > Those 3 should fix all the -1 votes and discussion on the list. > > Wido > > > Op 12 juli 2016 om 18:14 schreef Will Stevens <wstev...@cloudops.com>: > > > > > > Thank you, so this RC has officially failed. Can you guys please review > > those PRs and give me code review so I can be confident with those PRs. > I > > will run testing on those two PRs to make sure things don't break with > them. > > > > Is there anything else that needs to be added to the next RC, please > speak > > now so we can streamline this next RC. > > > > Thanks, > > > > *Will STEVENS* > > Lead Developer > > > > *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts > > 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 > > w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ > > > > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Sean Lair <sl...@ippathways.com> > wrote: > > > > > Hi all, I vote -1 and would like to see the jdbc:mysql and site-to-site > > > vpn fixed in 4.9. > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1610 > > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1480 > > > > > > Thanks! > > > Sean > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Wido den Hollander [mailto:w...@widodh.nl] > > > Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2016 1:48 AM > > > To: Sean Lair <sl...@ippathways.com>; dev@cloudstack.apache.org > > > Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.9.0 RC1 > > > > > > > > > > Op 11 juli 2016 om 22:40 schreef Sean Lair <sl...@ippathways.com>: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > One small comment since strongSwan didn't make it into 4.9. There is > > > still a very simple bug in enabling PFS for site-to-site VPNs. The > code > > > checks the Dead Peer Detection (DPD) variable instead of the PFS > variable > > > when determining whether or not to enable PFS for the site-to-site VPN. > > > > > > > > Here is the 1-line of code that is broken. You can see how it > refers to > > > dpd to set pfs. > > > > > > > > file.addeq(" pfs=%s" % CsHelper.bool_to_yn(obj['dpd'])) > > > > > > > > This pull request fixes the issue, but was not merged since we were > > > going to strongSwan. It would be nice if this bug fix was put into > 4.9.0 > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1480 > > > > > > > > > > Would it make you a -1 for you without this PR? If so, please vote -1 > :) > > > > > > Wido > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > Sean > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Will Stevens [mailto:williamstev...@gmail.com] > > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 6, 2016 3:52 PM > > > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > > > > Subject: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.9.0 RC1 > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > > I've created a 4.9.0 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/4.9.0-RC20160706T1546 > > > > Commit: 643f75aa9150156b1fb05f339a338614fc7ad3fb > > > > > > > > I will be updating the Release Notes with the changes in this release > > > tomorrow. If the RC changes, I can adapt the release notes after. > > > > > > > > Source release (checksums and signatures are available at the same > > > > location): > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/cloudstack/4.9.0/ > > > > > > > > PGP release keys (signed using CB818F64): > > > > 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) > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > Will > > > >
