Congrats Devdeep :)
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 12:16 AM, Chip Childers
chip.child...@sungard.comwrote:
The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache CloudStack
has asked Devdeep Singh to become a committer and we are pleased to
announce that they have accepted.
Being a committer allows
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 05:54:36AM +, Koushik Das wrote:
-Original Message-
From: williamstev...@gmail.com [mailto:williamstev...@gmail.com] On
Behalf Of Will Stevens
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 12:19 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; aemne...@gmail.com
Subject: Re:
I guess i'll answer my own question...
On May 14, 2013, at 4:35 PM, Chip Childers wrote:
Chiradeep (others),
Pedro Marques is working on a POC for an integration of Juniper's Contrail
technology. He's Cc'ed on this thread.
There are a number of questions related to system VM's below. Can
On 05/14/2013 05:34 PM, Hugo Trippaers wrote:
Hey all,
We have invested a lot of effort in creating upgrade paths from older releases
to the latest version. As a sysadmin this is one of the things I value
CloudStack for.
However as a developers there are some drawbacks to this. It means
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 06:43:44AM +, Koushik Das wrote:
Prasanna,
Interesting point. On one hand there is consistency and on the other
hand flexibility. Not sure if the framework should be restrictive or
as flexible as possible but I personally like the latter option.
Sorry, don't
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11026/#review20563
---
Ship it!
commit 7d380423b59fc45b588260baa50653bc8bff9e6b
Author:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11067/#review20564
---
Girish, thanks for the patch. I'm afraid the intentions are not
-Original Message-
From: Prasanna Santhanam [mailto:t...@apache.org]
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 12:25 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: Firewall rule question
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 06:43:44AM +, Koushik Das wrote:
Prasanna,
Interesting point. On one
On May 14, 2013, at 1:57 PM, David Nalley da...@gnsa.us wrote:
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Hugo Trippaers
htrippa...@schubergphilis.com wrote:
Sent from my iPhone
On 14 mei 2013, at 18:28, David Nalley da...@gnsa.us wrote:
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Hugo Trippaers
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11152/
---
Review request for cloudstack.
Description
---
just an organize import
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11174/
---
Review request for cloudstack and Hugo Trippaers.
Description
---
Midonet
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/10796/#review20567
---
Patch has been merged to master . Please mark the review request as
On May 15, 2013, 10:01 a.m., Pranav Saxena wrote:
Patch has been merged to master . Please mark the review request as
Submitted !
commit 9542f105927ceba39a4da0e2f63c85f21f1e43a1
Author: Sanjay Tripathi sanjay.tripa...@citrix.com
Date: Fri Apr 26 16:47:56 2013 +0530
CLOUDSTACK-1904:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/10903/
---
(Updated May 15, 2013, 10:06 a.m.)
Review request for cloudstack, Abhinandan
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11176/
---
Review request for cloudstack, Abhinandan Prateek, Kishan Kavala, Murali Reddy,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/10903/#review20569
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Nitin Mehta
On May 15, 2013, 10:06 a.m.,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11176/#review20571
---
Ship it!
commit 9b6513466f5826d4932bf69dcf3a531f05ac625c
- Kishan
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11157/#review20572
---
Ship it!
commit 737063891592af1d896f150cca02ff3d63a0198c
- Kishan
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11178/
---
Review request for cloudstack.
Description
---
In the new system vm
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11180/
---
Review request for cloudstack.
Description
---
debian: fix build of
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 02:03:49PM +0200, Wido den Hollander wrote:
Hi Chip,
Could you cherry-pick 68a428f84dea9c051456882d6762f419c40d90db into 4.1?
It's fix for https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-2515
which is imho a blocker. It prevents you from deploying Instances
from a
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11045/
---
(Updated May 15, 2013, 2:08 p.m.)
Review request for cloudstack and Prachi
On May 14, 2013, 12:16 a.m., Prachi Damle wrote:
Thanks for a clean patch and an extensive unit test. Have following review
comments:
1) When we list the VMs on a host (ListUserVmVO userVms =
_vmDao.listByHostId(host);), also consider the VMs that are stopped on this
host
Sebastian re-opened CLOUDSTACK-2463 due to users wanting to upgrade from
2.x to 4.1. This relates to the security groups feature being available
when using VLANs in an advanced networking zone. This feature was
apparently broken in the 3.x series, and is not slated to be
reintroduced until 4.2.
Starting a thread on this specific issue.
CLOUDSTACK-2492 was opened, which is basically the fact that the System
VMs aren't syncing time to the host or to an NTP server. The S3
integration is broken because of this problem, and therefore could not
be considered a function available in 4.1 if we
NB; The 402/410 deployments are on RHES64(OEL64) via RPMs built from
latest git repos.
/Ove
On 05/15/2013 03:02 PM, Ove Ewerlid wrote:
Hi!
When testing a deploy script, that works as expected with 4.0.2, on 4.1
I noticed that there was a need to pass plaintext passwords to
createUser, rather
Should this be applied to 4.1?
-chip
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 11:16:57AM +, Kishan Kavala wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11157/#review20572
I just opened CLOUDSTACK-2516 on this topic.
This is yet another release blocking issue. Anyone want to take it up?
-chip
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 04:22:14PM +0200, Ove Ewerlid wrote:
NB; The 402/410 deployments are on RHES64(OEL64) via RPMs built from
latest git repos.
/Ove
On 05/15/2013
Hi Chip,
Yes. and the patch for CLOUDSTACK-962 as well. Thanks!
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11181/
Wei
2013/5/15 Chip Childers chip.child...@sungard.com
Should this be applied to 4.1?
-chip
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 11:16:57AM +, Kishan Kavala wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11181/#review20584
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Chip Childers
On May 15, 2013, 2:47 p.m.,
On May 15, 2013, 2:55 p.m., Chip Childers wrote:
Applied to 4.1:
commit aed9a623d81c922af53e9c1f7116c1c7c85fdda5
Author: Wei Zhou w.z...@leaseweb.com
Date: Wed May 15 15:54:51 2013 +0100
CLOUDSTACK-685: This is the additional patch for CLOUDSTACK-685 (and
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11181/#review20586
---
This is the 4.1 commit for this review:
commit
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11157/#review20587
---
Ship it!
Committed to 4.1:
commit
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11157/#review20588
---
Commit aed9a623d81c922af53e9c1f7116c1c7c85fdda5 in branch
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/8971/#review20590
---
Commit e6af3bf112f33a8e02eb6d964ce799e6f30447e0 in branch
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 04:48:58PM +0200, Wei ZHOU wrote:
Hi Chip,
Yes. and the patch for CLOUDSTACK-962 as well. Thanks!
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11181/
Wei
Both were applied to 4.1. Can you please review to be sure that they
are in correctly.
Also, do either patch still need to be
Chip,
One other item I neglected to mention was that clock sync, at least for Xen
system VMs, wasn't an issue in the Jan-Feb timeframe. Previously when I
encountered these issues, syncing the host's clock and rebuilding the system
VMs addressed the issue. I assumed, but never verified, that
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11174/#review20592
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Hugo Trippaers
On May 15, 2013, 9:11 a.m.,
On May 15, 2013, 3:06 p.m., Hugo Trippaers wrote:
Ship It!
commit 987c3427dd26f36a060571d022efb7043d0ee473
Author: Joe Mills j...@midokura.jp
Date: Wed May 15 17:47:58 2013 +0900
Midonet Plugin bugfixes
* Updated SQL upgrade scripts to include midonet configs.
* Fixed bug
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 11:03:16AM -0400, John Burwell wrote:
Chip,
One other item I neglected to mention was that clock sync, at least for Xen
system VMs, wasn't an issue in the Jan-Feb timeframe. Previously when I
encountered these issues, syncing the host's clock and rebuilding the
Hi Chip,
If I could add my 10 cents worth.
I know of a number of potential CloudStack users who want to deploy CloudStack,
but ONLY when this feature is available as it is critical to their deployment
plans. One of them is actually looking at OpenStack as an alternative!
What I am also
(note mixing of public and private lists)
We need a security page for cloudstack.apache.org, so that I can add
CloudStack to http://www.apache.org/security/projects.html.
The board has requested that we get this done.
John, you started consolidating some stuff... do you mind driving this
to
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 03:10:44PM +, Geoff Higginbottom wrote:
Hi Chip,
If I could add my 10 cents worth.
I know of a number of potential CloudStack users who want to deploy
CloudStack, but ONLY when this feature is available as it is critical to
their deployment plans. One of
Half of our platforms are on 2.2.14 (advanced zone with security groups).
These platform work well. We are looking for a way to upgrade to 4.* for
more functionalities, so that we do not need to take the difference of
cloudstack version into account in development.
As I know, the citrix guys are
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/8971/#review20595
---
Commit 8f7a51ee5f5d745026d51b9ca3b2746a39f00bf2 in branch
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 09:20:06AM -0700, Alex Huang wrote:
I'm a very strong believer that CloudStack releases should always be
upgradable from previous releases. We can't strand our user base on a
previous release.
Agreed conceptually. Let's be clear though... these users have been
Marcus,
Excellent. So, it looks like we have KVM resolved. We just need to address
Xen and VMWare now. Do you think we need to any guidance to the documentation
regarding KVM time keeping (e.g. environmental prerequisites)?
Thanks,
-John
On May 15, 2013, at 12:39 PM, Marcus Sorensen
Marcus,
Linux seems like reasonable assumption to me for the 4.1 and 4.2 releases
because there doesn't appear a way to easily override the images. I think we
need to reconsider how we provision system VMs post-4.2 to address a number of
issues. If/when we address those issues, it become an
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11153/
---
(Updated May 15, 2013, 5:01 p.m.)
Review request for cloudstack and Prasanna
Hi,
Should I expect to have working IPv6 (for the VMs) in 4.1 or 4.2? If
not, in which version is this feature expected to land?
Lucian
--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
Nux!
www.nux.ro
Any thoughts on adding changelog into cloud.spec file pulled from git on the
build?
Something like the output of git log -oneline.
According to our resident Xen expert, any PV kernel automatically syncs to
the hardware clock on dom0.
On 5/15/13 9:50 AM, John Burwell jburw...@basho.com wrote:
Marcus,
Agreed. I think we need to add a set of hypervisor agnostic time
keeping guidelines to the documentation. I just wanted to
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11181/#review20599
---
Commit 8f7a51ee5f5d745026d51b9ca3b2746a39f00bf2 in branch
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/8971/#review20600
---
Commit 8f7a51ee5f5d745026d51b9ca3b2746a39f00bf2 in branch
Hi,
IPV6 feature is supported in 4.1 but it is experimental and UI is not available.
Also you will need to use System Vm templates that have support for ipv6.
Only Phase 1 from the FS -
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/IPv6+support is
supported.
In 4.2 , there will be
Perhaps this is a problem with DevCloud?
http://nerdboys.com/2011/03/15/how-to-fix-virtualbox-time-synchonization-pr
oblems/
On 5/15/13 10:17 AM, Chiradeep Vittal chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com
wrote:
According to our resident Xen expert, any PV kernel automatically syncs to
the hardware clock on
Hi,
I didn't find the old mail thread about this FS. Hence posting my review
comments in a new thread.
I have few queries/ comments after reviewing the FS [1]
[1] https://cwiki.apache.org/CLOUDSTACK/eip-enhancements.html
[2] Prior discussion thread : http://sy.pe/6bNG
1. Are we providing
Chiradeep,
The issue I am experiencing is that the system VMs are not syncing to dom0
on devcloud (i.e. the dom0 clock and the SSVM clock are different). As I
mentioned earlier in this thread, the syncing was working previously which
seems to jibe with your findings. What mechanism is used to
If there are no concerns, I will start merging these changes to master today.
Thanks,
Prachi
From: Prachi Damle [mailto:prachi.da...@citrix.com]
Sent: Friday, May 10, 2013 4:04 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: [MERGE] [CLOUDSTACK-2056] DeploymentPlanner choice via ServiceOffering
Hi
Fixed this particular problem to unblock the QA and dev. It should have
been if (!canHandleLbRules). The problem was introduced by my merge from
internalLb branch done with the single squashed commit
(2660a6b7a7f226ab757d2175222db62571813120) on May 9th. Not sure why
Nitin's merge from May 11th
On 15.05.2013 18:21, Sangeetha Hariharan wrote:
Hi,
IPV6 feature is supported in 4.1 but it is experimental and UI is not
available.
Also you will need to use System Vm templates that have support for
ipv6.
Only Phase 1 from the FS -
Members present: chiradeep, topcloud, animesh__, rajesh_battala, sudhap
Meeting summary:
1. Preface
2. ACS 41 release
3. ACS 42
a. Animesh to send a reminder to dev mailing list today (animesh__, 3)
4. general
Actions:
- Animesh to send
Regarding to bug: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-2481, there
is no vhd-util installed in system vm template, thus certain storage related
operations failed.
As discussed before, vhd-util binary is licensed under BSD and
GPL(https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-30),
The previous ones were on XS 5.6 FP2
This one's on XS 6.0.2
r-275166-VM 18:22:10 up 8 days,
domU: Wed May 15 18:22:10 UTC 2013
dom0: Wed May 15 11:22:10 PDT 2013
On 5/15/13 11:22 AM, Chiradeep Vittal chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com
wrote:
The normal S3 time sync is 15 minutes. I can't imagine a
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 10:49:11AM -0600, Marcus Sorensen wrote:
bfc5887a1bf6b41e88dd7a8f9987fcee8d3d9175
use kvmclock for system vms
Done
I am writing a new CloudStack Module and intend to use the newer Apache
HttpClient 4.x library.
I noted that none of the current CloudStack modules use this, they are using
the older HttpClient 3.x that has been EOL by Apache.
Commons HttpClient 3.x codeline is at the end of life. All users of
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 05:02:08PM +, Musayev, Ilya wrote:
Any thoughts on adding changelog into cloud.spec file pulled from git on the
build?
Something like the output of git log -oneline.
We can't assume that the build is happening based on a git repo. Our
release is a source tarball
On 5/14/13 10:58 PM, Pedro Marques ro...@juniper.net wrote:
I guess i'll answer my own question...
On May 14, 2013, at 4:35 PM, Chip Childers wrote:
Chiradeep (others),
Pedro Marques is working on a POC for an integration of Juniper's
Contrail
technology. He's Cc'ed on this thread.
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 11:00:57AM -0700, Edison Su wrote:
Regarding to bug: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-2481,
there is no vhd-util installed in system vm template, thus certain storage
related operations failed.
As discussed before, vhd-util binary is licensed under BSD
Chiradeep,
As I mentioned earlier, this issue is larger than S3-backed Secondary Storage.
It just happens that this issue was surfaced by testing that feature.Clock
drift exceeding than a few seconds can be operational issue (e.g. file
timestamps, logging, etc). A lack of reliable clock
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 02:48:13PM -0400, John Burwell wrote:
All of these things being said, it appears that the Xen behavior may be a
regression that can be addressed with a relatively straightforward fix
(dropping the proper file in /proc/sys/xen),
Agreed. Anyone want to submit the
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 06:38:26PM +, Soheil Eizadi wrote:
I am writing a new CloudStack Module and intend to use the newer Apache
HttpClient 4.x library.
I noted that none of the current CloudStack modules use this, they are using
the older HttpClient 3.x that has been EOL by Apache.
/proc/sys is not a regular filesystem and cannot be added to from the
shell.
Drivers need to add nodes into this filesystem.
On 5/15/13 11:50 AM, Chip Childers chip.child...@sungard.com wrote:
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 02:48:13PM -0400, John Burwell wrote:
All of these things being said, it
-Original Message-
From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 2:40 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] RPM BUILD - Add change log from git
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 05:02:08PM
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 12:02:41PM -0700, Chiradeep Vittal wrote:
/proc/sys is not a regular filesystem and cannot be added to from the
shell.
Drivers need to add nodes into this filesystem.
Backing up a bit...
This is the current system VM image that the 4.1 software should be
using on Xen:
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 07:06:10PM +, Musayev, Ilya wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 2:40 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] RPM BUILD
I am not sure why it is missing, but I will refer to
Citrix XenServer 6.0 Virtual Machine Installation Guide
http://s.apache.org/YGn
And quote
Time Handling in Linux VMs
By default, the clocks in a Linux VM are synchronized to the clock running
on the control domain, and cannot be
independently
Adding relevant folks from previous discussions of this feature to the
CC list.
One other note... From what I can tell, the work intended for 4.2 to
re-enable security groups within an advanced zone is limited to Xen and
KVM. I believe that Nicolas (the issue reporter) is using VMware.
We do
The following are currently blocking a new RC for 4.1.0:
CLOUDSTACK-2039
Improve console access security with 128-bit AES
encryption and securely-randomized key generation
This needs to be addressed. Kelven, do you mind reviewing Wido's error?
CLOUDSTACK-2463
CS Upgrade 2.Upgrade2.14 to 4.1.0
I'd ask for this be to enabled in vmware/vsphere is possible.
There are by far more vmware users in corporate/enteprise world than kvm and
xen.
-Original Message-
From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 3:26 PM
To:
For VMWare, the command
vmware-toolbox-cmd timesync status returns 'Disabled'. I can submit a
patch for /etc/init.d/cloud-early-config to enable it
On 5/15/13 12:23 PM, Chiradeep Vittal chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com
wrote:
I am not sure why it is missing, but I will refer to
Citrix XenServer 6.0
Hi everyone,
I'm at Build a Cloud Day today in San Francisco and had a question from a
potential CloudStack user about Storage as a Service.
His business would like to sell Storage as a Service (like Amazon S3) and
would like to know if CloudStack was an applicable solution for this use
case.
CloudStack isn't an object storage system really... the best bet, if
that's the focus of what he wants to do, is to look at things like Riak
CS, Swift, Ceph, etc...
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 02:13:29PM -0600, Mike Tutkowski wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm at Build a Cloud Day today in San Francisco
On 05/15/2013 10:47 PM, Chip Childers wrote:
CloudStack isn't an object storage system really... the best bet, if
that's the focus of what he wants to do, is to look at things like Riak
CS, Swift, Ceph, etc...
Indeed, I'd recommend looking at the RADOS Gateway [0] of Ceph. It gives
you a
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11045/#review20619
---
Ship it!
The changes in the patch look good. Please also add an
Did some further digging around as to why
/proc/sys/xen/independent_wallclock is not there on the Debian system vm.
TLDR; the kernel is PvOps (I.e., just a regular kernel that works like a
PV kernel, not a specialized paravirt kernel). To eliminate
special-casing, the independent_wallclock
Chiradeep,
As I think thought it, I don't think a documentation note will sufficient
because the SSVM can be destroyed and respawned by CloudStack without
intervention by a human. Therefore, we can get into a situation where an
operator installs and configures NTP, and then at some point in
All,
One other point to consider is that we only want NTP running for Xen system
VMs. Running NTP and VMWare Tools together causes big problems because the two
fight each other to sync the clock. I don;t know about KVM, but I wouldn't be
surprised if it doesn't have same types of problems.
Created blocker ticket to track this
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-2521
Anyone can please take a look on this ? we don't have latest template after
below fix
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-2324
Regards,
Rayees
From: Rayees Namathponnan
Sent: Tuesday,
I'm with Prasanna here, the behavioral inconsistency is baffling. How would
we document the differentiation at the api level?
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 12:34 AM, Koushik Das koushik@citrix.comwrote:
-Original Message-
From: Prasanna Santhanam [mailto:t...@apache.org]
Sent:
Sure, I agree. But I'd also point out that for the vast majority of
CloudStack users (4.1 at least), this is not going to be an issue. I
suggest deferring this to 4.1.1
A new template (easy or not) does require a full regression QA round.
On 5/15/13 2:07 PM, John Burwell jburw...@basho.com wrote:
Thanks, everyone!
A person is actually presenting on Riak CS right now. :)
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 2:53 PM, John Burwell jburw...@basho.com wrote:
Chip,
Disclaimer: I am an employee of Basho, makers of Riak CS.
+1.
The S3 compatibility layer provided by CloudStack lacks may of S3's
Chiradeep,
I disagree regarding the impact of this issue. Anyone running an SSVM will be
affected by this issue because clocks will eventually drift (sooner rather than
later) and when they do, any timestamps rendered by a system VM will unreliable
(e.g. files creation and modified times, log
Well, I disagree, from the perspective of hundreds of production clouds.
No harm has been perceived in those clouds due to this defect. If they can
live with it for several years, then they can live with it for a few more
months.
On 5/15/13 2:35 PM, Wido den Hollander w...@widodh.nl wrote:
On
All,
Basho Technologies [1] will be hosting Chip Childers for a meet up entitled
Cloudstack – What Is It and What’s Next on 29 May 2013 at our Herndon, VA
office. For more information and/or to RSVP, please see the meetup.com
announcement [2].
Thanks,
-John
[1]: http://www.basho.com
[2]:
Nothing wrong with running NTP in KVM System VM btw.
Wido
I think they are right that it will be fighting with the hypervisor
synced clock. It might not really pose much of an issue technically,
though.
-Original Message-
From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 12:43 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: [ACS41] Current blocker status
The following are currently blocking a new RC for 4.1.0:
CLOUDSTACK-2039
Improve console
I'll work on 4.2, after that, people can merge it to 4.1.
Anthony
-Original Message-
From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 9:25 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [ACS41] Discuss CLOUDSTACK-2463 being resolved in 4.1 vs 4.2
On
Fixed
On 5/15/13 2:14 PM, Rayees Namathponnan rayees.namathpon...@citrix.com
wrote:
Created blocker ticket to track this
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-2521
Anyone can please take a look on this ? we don't have latest template
after below fix
Merged.
--Sheng
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 12:26 PM, Chip Childers
chip.child...@sungard.comwrote:
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 12:05:21PM -0700, Sheng Yang wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 6:58 PM, Chip Childers chipchild...@apache.org
wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 03:16:28PM -0700, Sheng
1 - 100 of 106 matches
Mail list logo
