I don't think we should hold on improving our way of working just
because it is not perfect yet. Some things are unclear so we can't do
those. Other things are perfectly clear and need to wait for nothing
else. That doesn't mean that a second vote isn't needed. It is if not
for anything else then
I added a pre push hook to the [wiki page] which rejects any commits which
doesn’t start with ‘Merge branch’ on master
[wiki page]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Git#Git-githooks
~Rajani
On 05-Aug-2014, at 6:48 pm, Daan Hoogland
I am just wondering if the shift to a new develop branch is causing the
problems. Its a simple branch shift and should be no different from the current
master.
may be we should leave the master as is and create a ‘stable' branch which
would act like master in git-flow ?
ie)
ACS master -
See http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/job/simulator-singlerun/61/changes
Changes:
[santhosh.edukulla] Fixed coverity reported concurrency issue
--
[...truncated 7290 lines...]
[INFO]
Exactly Rajani, and other solutions are possible. The issue is not how
branches are called ;)
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Rajani Karuturi
rajani.karut...@citrix.com wrote:
I am just wondering if the shift to a new develop branch is causing the
problems. Its a simple branch shift and should
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/24313/#review49711
---
Gentle Reminder
- Gaurav Aradhye
On Aug. 5, 2014, 7:37 p.m.,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/24298/#review49712
---
Gentle Reminder
- Gaurav Aradhye
On Aug. 5, 2014, 8:43 p.m.,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/24232/#review49713
---
Gentle Reminder
- Gaurav Aradhye
On Aug. 5, 2014, 6:28 p.m.,
People,
Since there are some problems in 4.4.0 I am planning a bugfix release.
I created a wiki page for it. This only contains dates so far. I am
offline starting the 16th so I want to have it out by the 14th,
optimist that I am. For this to happen a successful RC must be
available by the 10th.
On 08/05/2014 11:51 PM, mo wrote:
Hello,
Is it permutable to install SSH keys on the hypervisor. Does Cloudstack speak
often to the hypervisor, as I have ALL in one, KVM Centos 6.5
No problem. The management server doesn't require SSH access into the
hypervisor after installation.
Wido
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/24313/
---
(Updated Aug. 6, 2014, 3:19 p.m.)
Review request for cloudstack and Santhosh
See http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/job/simulator-singlerun/63/changes
On Aug. 6, 2014, 7:09 a.m., Gaurav Aradhye wrote:
Gentle Reminder
Pushed to master.dda2820..adcfdf2 master - master
- Santhosh
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/24302/#review49720
---
Commit adcfdf2547ffccced8bcb06a627274bbb0664d7c in cloudstack's
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/24298/#review49721
---
test/integration/smoke/misc/test_deploy_vm.py
On Aug. 6, 2014, 7:09 a.m., Gaurav Aradhye wrote:
Gentle Reminder
adcfdf2..c38a15f master - master
- Santhosh
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/24232/#review49713
I remember we used to follow the practice of informing others in case db
changes are committed, but we do not do it anymore.
In case you are on dev setup on master branch post the following commit :
commit b9d834e83854009483f6d061f9996e5ffaa9b883
Author: Nitin Mehta nitin.me...@citrix.com
Date:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/24378/
---
Review request for cloudstack and Santhosh Edukulla.
Bugs: CLOUDSTACK-7268
Awesome, thank you!
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 6, 2014, at 5:08 AM, Wido den Hollander w...@widodh.nl wrote:
On 08/05/2014 11:51 PM, mo wrote:
Hello,
Is it permutable to install SSH keys on the hypervisor. Does Cloudstack
speak often to the hypervisor, as I have ALL in one, KVM
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/24313/#review49724
---
Commit 0a7af329f5386fa5fb2a2f9ebc02a2ca38bb9b17 in cloudstack's
Does anyone meet this issue:
Create VM using vxlan for isolation guest network,
both brvx-139 and vxlan139 is created,
tcpdump can see the pkts has been encapsulated and forward to cloudbr1, but
cloudbr1 does not forward pkts out from eth1, is there some special
configuration on eth1, cloudbr1
See http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/job/simulator-singlerun/changes
Since we have seen some activity and -1s on the [vote thread], I planning to
postpone this activity until we agree.
[vote thread] http://markmail.org/message/3qq7ihq6pg3ii7bu
~Rajani
On 05-Aug-2014, at 3:59 pm, Rajani Karuturi
rajani.karut...@citrix.commailto:rajani.karut...@citrix.com
+ Dev ML
This is great thanks for Sharing Vladimir!
On 05-Aug-2014, at 10:48 pm, Vladimir Melnik v.mel...@uplink.ua wrote:
Dear colleagues,
The 1.0.0 version has been released, the development branch has been merged
to the stable one.
Now you can use bin/makesnapshots.pl to automatically
Hi all,
post git flow related branching changes, we need to change the jenkins jobs
which run on master to the new unstable branch(develop)
everything under master tab @ http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/ should change
to the new branch.
looking for volunteers who can help with this. Anyone?
--
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 1:39 PM, Rajani Karuturi raj...@apache.org wrote:
Hi all,
post git flow related branching changes, we need to change the jenkins jobs
which run on master to the new unstable branch(develop)
everything under master tab @ http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/ should
change
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 10:54 AM, Daan Hoogland daan.hoogl...@gmail.com
wrote:
People,
Since there are some problems in 4.4.0 I am planning a bugfix release.
I created a wiki page for it. This only contains dates so far. I am
offline starting the 16th so I want to have it out by the 14th,
I’ll configure a new develop branch pipeline and configure jobs to check
feature and hotfix branches both with the simulator and the regular builds when
we create the develop branch. We don’t need to change the master build, just
add another pipeline for develop.
Cheers,
Hugo
On 6 aug.
Do you look for something like the Resources tab under : Infrastructure-
Zones- zonename - Resources ?
*Pierre-Luc DION*
Architecte de Solution Cloud | Cloud Solutions Architect
t 855.652.5683
*CloudOps* Votre partenaire infonuagique* | *Cloud Solutions Experts
420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|*
Thanks Erik and Hugo.
coverity job should be moved to develop branch. Rest all can exist both on
master and develop.
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Hugo Trippaers h...@apache.org wrote:
I’ll configure a new develop branch pipeline and configure jobs to check
feature and hotfix branches both
See http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/job/simulator-singlerun/65/changes
Changes:
[santhosh.edukulla] CLOUDSTACK-7255: Fixed marvin issue related to creating
random account usernames
--
[...truncated 7294 lines...]
main:
[INFO] Executed tasks
[INFO]
Thanks Saksham. This fixed the initial issue. But I noticed a new one, after
destroying the last VR if you select the infra view it again results in
exception. Not sure if anything else needs to be fixed.
-Original Message-
From: Saksham Srivastava [mailto:saksham.srivast...@citrix.com]
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/24298/
---
(Updated Aug. 6, 2014, 6:03 p.m.)
Review request for cloudstack and Santhosh
On Aug. 6, 2014, 3:31 p.m., Santhosh Edukulla wrote:
test/integration/smoke/misc/test_deploy_vm.py, line 85
https://reviews.apache.org/r/24298/diff/3/?file=652043#file652043line85
why we need a new tag?
Removed the new tag and assigned simulator only value to required_hardware
Hi Hugo,
+1
On a totally different issue, if we’re going to adopt git-flow let’s not use
bug fix branch names with the prefix “hotfix/“ because as the per convention
it’s for already released versions and for serious production issues. Instead,
I recommend that we can either go with
On 6 aug. 2014, at 15:06, Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com wrote:
Hi Hugo,
+1
On a totally different issue, if we’re going to adopt git-flow let’s not use
bug fix branch names with the prefix “hotfix/“ because as the per convention
it’s for already released versions and for
Hey,
On 06-Aug-2014, at 3:10 pm, Hugo Trippaers h...@trippaers.nl wrote:
On 6 aug. 2014, at 15:06, Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com wrote:
Hi Hugo,
+1
On a totally different issue, if we’re going to adopt git-flow let’s not use
bug fix branch names with the prefix “hotfix/“
On 6 aug. 2014, at 15:15, Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com wrote:
Hey,
On 06-Aug-2014, at 3:10 pm, Hugo Trippaers h...@trippaers.nl wrote:
On 6 aug. 2014, at 15:06, Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com wrote:
Hi Hugo,
+1
On a totally different issue, if we’re going to
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/24298/#review49732
---
test/integration/smoke/misc/test_deploy_vm.py
See http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/job/simulator-singlerun/66/changes
Do u turned neteork forward on? Sysctl -p can tell you the configuration
On Aug 6, 2014 7:09 PM, Michael Li cloudcomp...@163.com wrote:
Does anyone meet this issue:
Create VM using vxlan for isolation guest network,
both brvx-139 and vxlan139 is created,
tcpdump can see the pkts has been
I think the core difference between your implementations is that #1 assumes
that BVT/CI will catch 100% of errors, resulting in a stable master branch
with no problems. Or that development changes can be blindly merged if they
pass CI. The goal of git-flow is to allow a stream of development
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 9:41 AM, Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com wrote:
Hi,
Comments in-line;
On 05-Aug-2014, at 10:45 pm, Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.com
wrote:
Rayees,
I think you have the same misunderstanding as a lot of other folks
(including myself) had
See http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/job/simulator-hotfix-trigger/15/
--
[...truncated 7428 lines...]
main:
[INFO] Executed tasks
[INFO]
[INFO] exec-maven-plugin:1.2.1:java (create-schema-simulator) @
cloud-developer
[INFO]
[INFO] ---
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/23982/
---
(Updated Aug. 6, 2014, 2:41 p.m.)
Review request for cloudstack, sanjeev n and
To me this pretty much ties in to the discussion about the simulator and the
BVT/CI suite. This works very neatly with the work Alex has been doing and his
proposal on how to deal with the BVT test suite.
His original proposal was about constantly checking master and reverting any
commits that
Hi David,
On 06-Aug-2014, at 4:10 pm, David Nalley da...@gnsa.us wrote:
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 9:41 AM, Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com wrote:
Hi,
Comments in-line;
On 05-Aug-2014, at 10:45 pm, Alena Prokharchyk
alena.prokharc...@citrix.com wrote:
Rayees,
I think you have the
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/24383/
---
Review request for cloudstack and Santhosh Edukulla.
Bugs: CLOUDSTACK-7271
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/24378/
---
(Updated Aug. 6, 2014, 2:58 p.m.)
Review request for cloudstack and Santhosh
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Hugo Trippaers h...@trippaers.nl wrote:
To me this pretty much ties in to the discussion about the simulator and the
BVT/CI suite. This works very neatly with the work Alex has been doing and
his proposal on how to deal with the BVT test suite.
His original
Thanks for sending this out! These can be really helpful.
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 4:06 AM, Saksham Srivastava
saksham.srivast...@citrix.com wrote:
I remember we used to follow the practice of informing others in case db
changes are committed, but we do not do it anymore.
In case you are on
See http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/job/simulator-singlerun/67/changes
Changes:
[kishan.kavala] CLOUDSTACK-7237 : Added TAR image processor for templates with
tar extension
--
[...truncated 7273 lines...]
[INFO]
Rohit, addressing the following comment:
IMO We “should remove the release branches when done. Instead there is a
support workflow with git-flow (see support
http://yakiloo.com/getting-started-git-flow/) and also in the tooling (git
flow support etc. though experimental).”
If we remove the
On Aug. 6, 2014, 1:19 p.m., Doug Clark wrote:
test/integration/smoke/misc/test_deploy_vm.py, line 1
https://reviews.apache.org/r/24298/diff/4/?file=653689#file653689line1
Generally, how does putting these test in a separate directory help?
Doesn't nosetests recursively search
Why implement something that doesn¹t serve any practical purpose for CS??
We should adopt only things that would address current CS problems -
regressions, unstable releases, etc. That would mean - running the
automation (CI, BVT) on *develop branch, cut the *fix branches for hot
Agree with Daan. The first vote was needed to get the peoples opinions on
whether we need to change our current git model (we certainly do as there
are so many problems in the current flow), and the article was just the
point of reference on how other people do it on the field. Now we have to
see
On 06-Aug-2014, at 6:58 pm, Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.com
wrote:
Why implement something that doesn¹t serve any practical purpose for CS??
We should adopt only things that would address current CS problems -
regressions, unstable releases, etc. That would mean - running the
Rohit, thank you for the explanation. So we cut the maintenance release
from the master branch, not *develop as opposed to the major release
branch.
One more open question. Its clear that we cut the maintenance release from
the master branch, but what would be the right way to merge it back if
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/24314/#review49757
---
I tested the flow and it looks good to me.
I did review the code
This should be automated. We can't rely on the good intentions of dev.
All we need is a script which checks changes in the schema/java Upgrade
files and to sends a notification to the dev list.
Filed a bug for this -
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-7273
Thanks,
-Nitin
On
Hi,
On 06-Aug-2014, at 7:30 pm, Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.com
wrote:
Rohit, thank you for the explanation. So we cut the maintenance release
from the master branch, not *develop as opposed to the major release
branch.
One more open question. Its clear that we cut the
Thank you, Nitin. I think we should add one more item to the things that
the script checks: modifications to the older upgrade paths shouldn¹t be
allowed. If we already released 4.4, db upgrade changes should be accepted
only to 4.4-4.5 scripts. If someone makes the changes to, say 4.3-4.4, the
Rohit, whatever you say below, just proves our original worry about
handling the maintenance minor releases (see my comments below). We can’t
possibly adopt the way where release branches get removed since we always
support maintenance releases for multiple versions at a time: 4.2.1,
4.3.1, 4.4.1.
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:06 PM, Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com wrote:
Hi,
On 06-Aug-2014, at 7:30 pm, Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.com
wrote:
Rohit, thank you for the explanation. So we cut the maintenance release
from the master branch, not *develop as opposed to the
Agreed. Added that information in the bug.
On 06/08/14 11:08 AM, Alena Prokharchyk alena.prokharc...@citrix.com
wrote:
Thank you, Nitin. I think we should add one more item to the things that
the script checks: modifications to the older upgrade paths shouldn¹t be
allowed. If we already released
On 8/6/14, 11:22 AM, David Nalley da...@gnsa.us wrote:
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:06 PM, Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com
wrote:
Hi,
On 06-Aug-2014, at 7:30 pm, Alena Prokharchyk
alena.prokharc...@citrix.com wrote:
Rohit, thank you for the explanation. So we cut the maintenance release
What about the details for updating your DB?
If we just receive a general e-mail notification, then each dev will
independently have to examine the DB changes to come up with a workaround
to keep his/her current env running properly after a code update.
On Wednesday, August 6, 2014, Nitin Mehta
Hi,
I am getting this error while deploying a VM on XENSERVER :
2014-08-06 21:42:22,774 DEBUG [c.c.a.ApiServlet] (catalina-exec-2:ctx-6c894fdd)
===START=== 10.144.7.6 -- GET
I doubt we can fully automate this one, Mike, for the case when data
migration/modification is involved (.java file is modified in this case). Only
for the changes to .sql files we can automate the instructions. For data
modification, the developer who’s made the changes, still needs to provide
Mike - I agree that automation might not resolve the issue completely but
will better devs lives.
I think for schema file changes just the diffs published should do. For
Java files it might sometimes require some more analysis and manual input
from dev.
Nevertheless it will always send a
Yep, I agree.
I guess my point was that a manually created e-mail should still be issued
by the developer.
On Wednesday, August 6, 2014, Alena Prokharchyk
alena.prokharc...@citrix.com wrote:
I doubt we can fully automate this one, Mike, for the case when data
migration/modification is
Hi,
If it was not clear, let me re-state — just because I’m participating in this
thread does not mean I fully support git-flow, or I am here to defend it.
The proposal thread warriors Rajani, Daan, Leo and others can comment and
advise?
I like couple of good ideas in it, and I think it’s
If you care, why not self-police use git hooks:
http://markmail.org/message/h5yb27jy6qrrw4dh
Cheers.
On 06-Aug-2014, at 8:51 pm, Mike Tutkowski mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com wrote:
Yep, I agree.
I guess my point was that a manually created e-mail should still be issued
by the developer.
On
Since you turned in DEBUG logging, the “Refusing to design” messages are
normally expected. The code steps through all registered network gurus, and
only those with the right type you requested will design the network. All
others will produce the “refusing” statement.
KC
On Aug 6, 2014, at
Agree with you, Rohit. The changes to the git model we use, are needed
indeed. But we should address only the problems that CS faces, and the
main problem - quality control. The proposal should be limited just to the
changes that are really needed for the CS, and that will work with the
current CS
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 7:30 PM, Alena Prokharchyk
alena.prokharc...@citrix.com wrote:
Rohit, thank you for the explanation. So we cut the maintenance release
from the master branch, not *develop as opposed to the major release
branch.
Here's what happens if you want to create a support (ie
Once you merge release branch it on master/stable branch, you don’t lose
commit if you delete it. It’s like removing a feature branch once it’s
merged on master/target branch.
Correct. At t his point your release is in master. If you need to bug
fix, you checkout that tag from master.
Also, as
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 9:21 PM, Alena Prokharchyk
alena.prokharc...@citrix.com wrote:
Agree with you, Rohit. The changes to the git model we use, are needed
indeed. But we should address only the problems that CS faces, and the
main problem - quality control. The proposal should be limited
On 8/6/14, 12:52 PM, Erik Weber terbol...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 9:21 PM, Alena Prokharchyk
alena.prokharc...@citrix.com wrote:
Agree with you, Rohit. The changes to the git model we use, are needed
indeed. But we should address only the problems that CS faces, and the
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/24420/
---
(Updated Aug. 6, 2014, 8:37 p.m.)
Review request for cloudstack, Doug Clark
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/24420/
---
(Updated Aug. 6, 2014, 8:41 p.m.)
Review request for cloudstack, Doug Clark
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/24425/
---
Review request for cloudstack, Doug Clark, Sanjay Tripathi, and Santhosh
This seems to be your issue
[c.c.r.ResourceManagerImpl] (API-Job-Executor-2:ctx-e92d4da4 job-420
ctx-8546dbd9 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) Host ID: 1 does not have GPU device
available
2014-08-06 21:42:23,493 INFO [c.c.a.m.a.i.FirstFitAllocator]
(API-Job-Executor-2:ctx-e92d4da4 job-420 ctx-8546dbd9
Here you go, modify and install in your git repositories:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/blob/master/tools/git/db-police
It will audaciously alert you, on OSX using ‘say’ and on GNU/Linux using
‘festival’ (if installed).
I was not sure about Windows, so if anyone can cover that case?
Alena,
I think this is a matter of semantics. If you call the latest version
that got through the CI a pre-release and add them as releases in the
git-flow way of working on master you've got what you envision.
In spite of my mail this morning I am not a warrior (though I like the
compliment,
-Original Message-
From: Alena Prokharchyk [mailto:alena.prokharc...@citrix.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 12:59 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] git workflow
On 8/6/14, 12:52 PM, Erik Weber terbol...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 9:21
Daan, thank you for the summary. See my answers below.
On 8/6/14, 1:59 PM, Daan Hoogland daan.hoogl...@gmail.com wrote:
Alena,
I think this is a matter of semantics. If you call the latest version
that got through the CI a pre-release and add them as releases in the
git-flow way of working on
Edison, thank you for raising the concern about the BVT/CI. Somebody
mentioned earlier that we should separate git workflow implementation from
the CI effort, but I do think we have to do in in conjunction. Otherwise
what is the point in introducing staging/develop branch? If there is no
daily
See http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/job/simulator-singlerun/68/changes
Edison, thank you for raising the concern about the BVT/CI. Somebody mentioned
earlier that we should separate git workflow implementation from the CI
effort, but I do think we have to do in in conjunction. Otherwise what is the
point in introducing staging/develop branch? If there is no daily
[top posting, apologies in advance]
I am on vacation, so I will go straight to it :)
This all discussion is not about gitflow specifically, it is about modifying
our git workflow and our commit practices to something more standard that can:
- ultimately help improve quality (in itself it won't
On Aug 6, 2014, at 6:13 PM, Prachi Damle prachi.da...@citrix.com wrote:
Edison, thank you for raising the concern about the BVT/CI. Somebody
mentioned earlier that we should separate git workflow implementation from
the CI effort, but I do think we have to do in in conjunction. Otherwise
On 8/6/14, 3:18 PM, Sebastien Goasguen run...@gmail.com wrote:
[top posting, apologies in advance]
I am on vacation, so I will go straight to it :)
This all discussion is not about gitflow specifically, it is about
modifying our git workflow and our commit practices to something more
standard
-Original Message-
From: Sebastien Goasguen [mailto:run...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 3:23 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: Edison Su
Subject: Re: [VOTE] git workflow
On Aug 6, 2014, at 6:13 PM, Prachi Damle prachi.da...@citrix.com wrote:
Edison, thank you for
See http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/job/simulator-singlerun/changes
-Original Message-
From: Sebastien Goasguen [mailto:run...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 3:19 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] git workflow
[top posting, apologies in advance]
I am on vacation, so I will go straight to it :)
This all
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 5:36 PM, Alena Prokharchyk
alena.prokharc...@citrix.com wrote:
Edison, thank you for raising the concern about the BVT/CI. Somebody
mentioned earlier that we should separate git workflow implementation from
the CI effort, but I do think we have to do in in conjunction.
Hey Tim,
What is the current status of this Review Board item from your point of
view?
https://reviews.apache.org/r/22799/
Is this far enough along that we might soon consider merging it in for 4.5?
Talk to you later!
--
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e:
I have resolved this issue by disable snooping
echo 0 /sys/devices/virtual/net/cloudbr1/bridge/multicast_snooping
sysctl -p
Thanks Yitao anyway
At 2014-08-06 09:44:46, Yitao Jiang willier...@gmail.com wrote:
Do u turned neteork forward on? Sysctl -p can tell you the configuration
On Aug
See http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/job/simulator-singlerun/70/changes
Changes:
[nitin.mehta] CLOUDSTACK-7272: Router stop fails with NPE. Fixing it by making
the hostId as Long object than native type long. The issue was the response was
checking for getHostId() != null to populate attribute
1 - 100 of 106 matches
Mail list logo
