Issue 9367

Hi all News about issue 9367? https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9367 I need a volume with 6TB. If I create an extended volume with 3x 2TB that issue affect the environment. Env: XenServer 6.5, ACS 4.9.2, Guest Win2k12 R2 HVM Thanks Marcelo

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.10.0.0 RC6

Thanks for confirming. I will keep this RC open for two more days for others to test before next RC. Agree on merging PRs part. That is our release principle in general. ~ Rajani http://cloudplatform.accelerite.com/ On June 28, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Kris Sterckx (kris.ster...@nuagenetworks.net)

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.10.0.0 RC6

Hi Rajani, Yes we qualified that fix. Can anyone else pls also confirm. To be very clear - this is a generic issue (with native VR based ACS), not tight to Nuage at all. We should not take in new PR's when we move from RC to RC to my view - this way always new issues will pop up. Best, Kris

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.10.0.0 RC3

> Op 28 juni 2017 om 11:10 schreef Rajani Karuturi : > > > Yes, those shouldn't have been merged. We should have released > faster and then merged. > > Lets think of it as ours and us than theirs and those. > True! So let's see if we can get 4.10 out of the door and get

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.10.0.0 RC3

Yes, those shouldn't have been merged. We should have released faster and then merged. Lets think of it as ours and us than theirs and those. ~ Rajani http://cloudplatform.accelerite.com/ On June 28, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Paul Angus (paul.an...@shapeblue.com) wrote: Those new PRs should not have

[Discuss] Gaps in Smoketest coverage

Hi all, Can you guys share your thoughts on particular areas that you think our current smoketest is missing. Let’s try to come up with a list we can work with, so we can 1) Check if there are already part of “Integration Tests Suite” or 2) Create tasks and develop the tests. Thanks, Boris

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.10.0.0 RC3

I don't think creating a branch will help in releasing faster. It will only make it worse in my opinion. If we can release faster, features will stay in the PR branch for a short while and can be merged quickly. ~ Rajani http://cloudplatform.accelerite.com/ On June 28, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Daan

RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.10.0.0 RC3

Those new PRs should not have been merged. Those on the mailing list should respect the process and accept that they will have to wait until code is unfrozen. Kind regards, Paul Angus paul.an...@shapeblue.com  www.shapeblue.com 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.10.0.0 RC3

I'm with Mike on this. fixes go into the rc branch, features don't and that's a clearer line then we have now. or we could just keep rc'ing untill one passes and keep working on stablising whichever branch we choose for that allowing both features and fixes. On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 8:40 AM,

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.10.0.0 RC3

Paul, Which shows we are not actively following RCs. That PR was a blocker for RC3 and was well discussed. That PR is a perfect example that we are not working as community to release code. That is a fix for a blocker which stayed open for more than 45 days. If you see till RC2 it was only

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.10.0.0 RC3

Hi, I personally still like the idea of a new branch being created right around the time we cut our first RC. Even if people want to commit changes to the new branch, they should understand that that code won't be formally released until the pending RC is validated and released. That being

RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.10.0.0 RC3

Rajani, I suspect that fatigue with the 4.10 release testing that we are seeing is due to the time it has taken to release it. And that is has been caused by new code going in, which have introduced new bugs. This was demonstrated in the last -1 from Kris. This change was merged 10 days ago.