Re: [VOTE] Move 'apache/cloudstack' -> 'apache-cloudstack/cloudstack'

Makes sense Shane if we can have that role shared amongst several people of the PMC, not just one as you suggest. On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 2:41 AM, Shane Curcuru wrote: > Will Stevens wrote earlier: > ... snip... > > *Proposal:* > > Transfer ownership of the 'apache/cloudstack' mirrored repositor

Re: Issue: CLOUDSTACK-9255 Unable to start VM DomainRouter due to error in finalizeStart

Boris closed it, @Boris why? On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 12:14 PM, Remi Bergsma wrote: > Hi, > > This issue has been resolved some time ago but unfortunately the PR hasn’t > been merged nor tested yet. > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1400 > > This PR makes it like 50-60 times faster,

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

d, yes, there was the impression > and (mis)understanding that "moving" to GH was indeed what > was desired and "demanded". > > My post was in direct response to Sebastien's query, as was hopefully > indicated by including that paragraph in my post. > > &g

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 7:50 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > > On Mar 19, 2016, at 2:12 PM, sebgoa wrote: > > > > > > Personally I have always thought that this is a very serious issue and > trend in open source projects and that ASF (and the board in particular) > should try to proactively address

Re: External fork of Cloudstack

ly > change based on this outcome. I think we should put that org on ice for the > time being. > On Mar 19, 2016 9:59 AM, "Daan Hoogland" wrote: > > > On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Will Stevens > > wrote: > > > > > I see you found the vote thread.

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

ion? ​Any other ideas/questions? ​let's discuss or better,​ Reading this back I can see how this can be interpreted in several ways, I'm sorry. [1] http://markmail.org/message/pca3j6vzojik2xyd On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: > On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Da

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

Thanks for the explanation Sam, I have to ask for your patience with me as there is one remark in there that leaves me confused; Don't feel obligated to answer in length but please confirm or negate my suspicion On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: ​...​ > Despite this clear failure

Re: github organisation cloudstack

Will, On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Will Stevens wrote: > Please be advised this conversation is continuing in a thread titled: Re: > External fork of Cloudstack > > Mailing list link: > > http://markmail.org/message/53ct2mma4x4jm6s2?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Re:+Extern

Re: External fork of Cloudstack

On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Will Stevens wrote: > I see you found the vote thread. Thanks for voting. :) > > For now I think it is best that we try to avoid using the cloudstack org > for anything in order to mitigate confusion and try to get everyone on the > same page. We are charting new

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 8:24 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > That sounds like a cop-out to me related to what's really going > on. > ​Jim, I am not a native english speaker and this remark has no meaning to me. It sounds somewhat hostile, can you explain what you mean? ​ -- Daan

Re: External fork of Cloudstack

Hm, Will let's use a vote thread for voting. My brain is old and rigid and needs the clarity of it. Just to be clear, are we keeping the cloudstack organisation for experimenting and we do the move to apache-cloudstack? I am not sure if github has a policy on naming of organisations so It would be

Re: [VOTE] Move 'apache/cloudstack' -> 'apache-cloudstack/cloudstack'

+1 (binding as I saw others mention that. I doubt this is of any concern in such a technical decision) On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 12:40 PM, Will Stevens wrote: > Thank you for this information, this is very helpful. > On Mar 19, 2016 5:29 AM, "Rene Moser" wrote: > > > On 03/18/2016 11:44 PM, Will

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:37 AM, Will Stevens wrote: > I may be thinking too far outside the box, but hear me out as this is > likely the best way to satisfy everyone's requirements. > > Recap: The community needs additional github permissions in order to > integrate CI in order to maintain code

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 5:51 PM, Chris Mattmann wrote: > As to forks being against Apache > policy, forks are not, however forks that use the Apache e.g., > namespace, that have the Apache logo, that use the Apache name for > the project *are* against Apache policy. If it’s a fork, it needs > a n

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

Chris, I don't see how cloudstack/cloudstack can be a problem to the foudation except for the PMC as they will be left with managing keeping it in sync. I also don't see how a fork can be against apache policy as anyone is allowed to fork the software at any time. We as PMC are no exception (wisd

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 6:23 PM, sebgoa wrote: > “cloudstack” is a trademark of the ASF. ​ok, good. I thought is was refused on the grounds of being to generic a term.​ -- Daan

github organisation cloudstack

devs, There is a github organisation called cloudstack, to which we have more control then to the apache/cloudstack repo on github. We need to decide as community what to do with it. What are we going to do in this new organisation? Will we let/ask Schuberg Philis to put cosmic in there? Will be

Re: Build failed in Jenkins: build-master-slowbuild #3451

PR to fix that > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1438 > > Can someone help to review and execute functional tests(integration tests)? > > > On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 5:48 AM, Daan Hoogland > wrote: > > > Dear RMs, > > > > I've seen prom

Re: Build failed in Jenkins: build-master-slowbuild #3451

Dear RMs, I've seen promising discussions about CI and of course these are talks about far more important things then findbugs issues but still... The jenkins builds that we have have been failing for a while. This one and the systemvm one I think. Still people keep working on new stuff, not payi

Re: Create/edit permissions for ACS wiki

On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Rajsekhar K wrote: > rajsekharkpally ​is in​ -- Daan

Re: [PROPOSAL] Minimum Viable CI Integration

*Cloud Solutions Experts > >> > > >420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 > >> > > >w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ > >> > > > > >> > > >On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 12:36 PM, Bharat Kumar < > >> > > bharat.ku...@accelerite.com>

Re: [PROPOSAL] Minimum Viable CI Integration

details. > > > > *Will STEVENS* > > Lead Developer > > > > *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts > > 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 > > w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ > > > > On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 8:53 AM, Daan Hoogland >

Re: [PROPOSAL] Minimum Viable CI Integration

Will, Do you have an implementation of notify-pr? I am asking as you specify it will be implemented in golang which seems odd. It is not amongst the 7 or so languages already in use. On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 1:54 AM, Will Stevens wrote: > Hey Everyone, > As I am sure most of you are aware, I have

Re: Build failed in Jenkins: build-systemvm64-master #766

Rajesh or anybody else involved, The systemvm build job in buildacloud keeps failing trying to connect to an old user directory. Does anybody know why this dir is used? Is there a stock hv-kvp-daemon_3.1_amd64.deb we can use instead? On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 10:23 AM, wrote: > See

Re: 4.9 Release Management

People, I agree that CI is an important issue and I thank Will for taking owner ship. Will: Thank you. I will keep watching the builds.apache.org part of it and hammer on new or old :/s findbugs issues that come up. 4.9 and CI are not related directly. CI would be related to release process and no

Re: Build failed in Jenkins: build-master-slowbuild #3368

thanks Raja On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 7:48 PM, Raja Pullela wrote: > Daan, I will try to test this out.. > > -Original Message- > From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 11:57 PM > To: dev > Subject: Fwd: Build failed in

Fwd: Build failed in Jenkins: build-master-slowbuild #3368

People, these were irritating me. I wrote a quick fix [1]. Anyone feels like running a test on it? [1] https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1427 -- Forwarded message -- From: Date: Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:09 PM Subject: Build failed in Jenkins: build-master-slowbuild #3368 To

Re: PR validation using proposed CI.

Bharat, will you publish the results in the PR? On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 6:23 AM, Bharat Kumar wrote: > Hi, > > As all of you know from earlier discussions in the community, we have been > working on implementing a CI to test github PRs and publish results. We > have implemented this > internally

Re: VM state = Expunging

echnologies B.V. > > T: +31 20 316 0235 > M: > E: n.tava...@tech.leaseweb.com > W: http://www.leaseweb.com > > Luttenbergweg 8, 1101 EC Amsterdam, Netherlands > > > > From: Daan Hoogland [daan.hoogl...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, Februar

[ANNOUNCE] New committer: Rafael Weingartner

the need to have contributions reviewed via the patch submission process. Whether contributions are development-related or otherwise, it is a recognition of a contributor's participation in the project and commitment to the project and the Apache Way. Please join me in congratulating Rafael -

Re: CWiki access / new page request

assuming you are nlivens in cwiki you are added. On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 8:29 AM, Nick LIVENS wrote: > Hi, > > I want to submit a design document for CloudStack. I don't have any write > access to the CWiki. I've created a ticket on INFRA, but they redirect me > here. > Could anyone give me edit

Re: VM state = Expunging

I ran into that as well, a while ago. IMNSHO the VM record should be deleted after the state expunging, so a state of expunged would never make sense. Deabatable of course. On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 7:03 AM, Mike Tutkowski < mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Is anyone able to confirm t

Re: question on certificate upload

private key and it doesn't appear in the db). API call worked > for me. > > Regards, Remi > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On 17 Feb 2016, at 18:52, Daan Hoogland wrote: > > > > forgot to mention: version 4.7.1 I don't think that matters but still. >

question on certificate upload

H, If I upload a new certificate from the infrastructure tab, the timestamp of the certificates in the consoleproxy in /usr/local/cloud/systemvm/certs stay the same, even after destroying teh cpvm. Am I doing something wrong or expecting the wrong thing to happen? ​thanks,​ -- Daan

Re: question on certificate upload

forgot to mention: version 4.7.1 I don't think that matters but still. On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote: > H, > > If I upload a new certificate from the infrastructure tab, the timestamp > of the certificates in the consoleproxy in /usr/local/cloud/systemvm

Re: [DISCUSS] CloudMonkey release work

Thanks Rohit, I think I use it from github at some of my CLIs but I will give some attention to the points you mentioned over the coming days. regards, On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 5:38 PM, Rohit Yadav wrote: > Hi all, > > It’s been months since the last official cloudmonkey release. I know many >

Re: [PROPOSAL] - Reference Guide for CloudStack configuration parameters

I like the idea but shouldn't it be part of the source code and extracted from there? What is the need to have it in a separate wiki? On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 9:18 AM, Rohit Yadav wrote: > Nice, maybe put this on our cwiki so others can collaborate than do this > over a word doc? > > Regards. > >

Spannish translation mangled

@Milamber and other internationalisation specialists. I cannot get access to the spannish strings on transifex. It seems these get mangled into the source base. for instnce ```label.traffic.type=Tipo de Tráfico``` or ```label.total.of.vm=Total de máquinas virtuales```. Can someone give me access?

Re: [DISCUSS: FINDBUG] FW: Build failed in Jenkins: build-master-slowbuild #3120

What do you mean Abhi, I see only two in the report that are failing this build. For those a PR is out there. On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 4:20 AM, Abhinandan Prateek < abhinandan.prat...@shapeblue.com> wrote: > The slow build shows lot more findbug errors than when the findbug is run > in the dev envi

Re: Admin access to jenkins.buildacloud.org

I think you are hooked, not sure though. You had the same rights as I. I added the right to build slaves. Maybe you need to give yourself more rights still On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 8:59 AM, Wido den Hollander wrote: > Hi, > > I see that the package generation for RPM and DEB isn't working properl

silence findbugs

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1351 is still open for the last two issues to silence findbugs. please all have a look. -- Daan

Re: disable github notifications ?

On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 11:42 AM, Sebastien Goasguen wrote: > January starts with 50 jenkins failed build emails... > > ​Ah, don't forget we have our own jenkins and the builds.pache.org​ ones. The ones going to github are the builds builds named cloudstack-pr-analysis. The master-slow-build is i

Re: [PROPOSAL] Freeze everything until we get CI

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 9:18 PM, Sebastien Goasguen wrote: > Now Travis is not running, Jenkins fails all the time and nobody cares… > ​Sebastien, Jenkins succeeds more then 50% of the time and I do care. Please report problems with jenkins.​ -- Daan

Re: disable github notifications ?

I'm with Remi on this Biligual auto correct use. Read at your own risico Op 27 jan. 2016 5:15 PM schreef "Remi Bergsma" : > I say we keep the notifications. GitHub is about development and this is > the dev list, right? It really helps keeping track of what is going on. > It's way faster than cl

Re: Quick note about $dayjob

Good luck with your new startup. Hope it sails you to nice shores. On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 3:30 PM, Sebastien Goasguen wrote: > Hi folks, > > As some of you might have guessed I am changing $dayjob. > > This is an exciting time for me, but it also means that I will become less > involved with Cl

Re: New Defects reported by Coverity Scan for cloudstack

hly off topic, but could coverity be integrated with our PR workflow? > > Erik > > Den mandag 25. januar 2016 skrev Daan Hoogland > følgende: > > > Did a quick scan of the reported new issues. All four are older then the > > last report. Anybody feels like taking ownersh

Re: New Defects reported by Coverity Scan for cloudstack

Did a quick scan of the reported new issues. All four are older then the last report. Anybody feels like taking ownership? On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 4:13 PM, wrote: > > Hi, > > Please find the latest report on new defect(s) introduced to cloudstack > found with Coverity Scan. > > 4 new defect(s) i

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.8.0

did a minimal verification creating an advanced zone with security groups and shared network. instantiated a vm which started and was visible from the hypervisor, in the gui and from cloudmonkey. ​It is all the verification I can spare this round​. Did it on both 4.7.1 and 4.8.0 +1 (binding) for

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.7.1

On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 11:11 AM, Daan Hoogland wrote: > As a matter of order, I have until Saturday afternoon, right? I am seeing > reasonably good results so far but I need to find time to test in an > advanced zone with security groups and zone wide primary storage as we use >

Re: Build failed in Jenkins: build-master-slowbuild #3047

I think the 5 issues that lead to these errors are fixed in PRs can people please review them and make sure these failures stop? thanks On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 1:09 PM, wrote: > See > > --

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.7.1

On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Remi Bergsma wrote: > I’ll keep the votes open until Monday evening CET. > > Would that be OK? > ​fine, thanks. I'll do some extra testing over the weekend.​ -- Daan

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.7.1

As a matter of order, I have until Saturday afternoon, right? I am seeing reasonably good results so far but I need to find time to test in an advanced zone with security groups and zone wide primary storage as we use in Leaseweb. (tentative +1) On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 10:35 AM, Remi Bergsma wrot

Re: [PROPOSAL] LTS Release Cycle

Rohit, I don't see any reasons beyond lack of discipline, ignorance, and laziness in your description. Not of an RM or other individual btw but of the community as a whole. In point 1 and 2 you are describing how cherry-pick and forward merge are actually the same amount of work. In the case of fo

Re: [PROPOSAL] LTS Release Cycle

John, I really don't see any reason to allow backporting. We refuse new features in LTS and with that have no excuse to backport anything any more. Can you give an example to prove me wrong? On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 10:01 PM, Paul Angus wrote: > Hi Ilya (and all others), > > We (ShapeBlue) agree

Re: [ANNOUNCE] New PMC member: Boris Roman Schrijver

Welcome Boris, Hope you stay with us long long time :) On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 3:52 PM, Rohit Yadav wrote: > Congrats and welcome Boris! > > > > > [image: ShapeBlue] > Rohit Yadav > Software Architect , ShapeBlue > d: * | s: +44 203 603 0540* <%7C%20s:%20+44%20203%20

Re: [PROPOSAL] LTS Release Cycle

ommit hashes stay the same and fixes are easily > > traceable. > > > > Just my $0.02. > > > > Regards, > > Remi > > > > > > > > > > > > On 19/01/16 08:45, "Daan Hoogland" wrote: > > > > >On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at

Re: [PROPOSAL] LTS Release Cycle

On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 4:20 AM, John Burwell wrote: > In terms of the merge strategy, nothing about the current process would > change. Defects would be fixed on the branch where they occurred and then > forward ported to master. For each maintained LTS branch less than 14 > months old, only blo

Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: SecurityGroupRulesCmd code cleanup

On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 12:57 PM, rafaelweingartner wrote: > Github user rafaelweingartner commented on the pull request: > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1287#issuecomment-172196150 > > @DaanHoogland, > I reviewed your code and I have a few suggestions/questions. > >

Re: [DISCUSS][PROPOSE] use of optional instead of null

ed > solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or > opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily > represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or related companies. If you are not the > intended recipient of this email, you must neither t

200 PRs open

Please all come to arms. We are in a release phase again since yesterday, with only one RM and 200 PRs open. Please go through your PRs and see if - any improvement is needed - more reviewer are needed - testing is needed - whether it can be closed. A lot of coding is happening and not enough QA

Re: svn commit: r977802 - /websites/production/cloudstack/content/

sad, melancholic moment. On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 8:06 PM, wrote: > Author: jlk > Date: Fri Jan 15 19:06:50 2016 > New Revision: 977802 > > Log: > Removing Stratosec from users list > > Added: > websites/production/cloudstack/content/ > - copied from r977801, websites/staging/cloudstack

Re: [PROPOSAL] LTS Release Cycle

+0, John, I admire your efforts but I would like to see a proposal more in line with our present process for PR merging and releasing. For 4.5 we have a bootstrap problem, here so that would reauire a transistion period (unless we start branding our LTS on 4.7) I also don see the neccesity for anyt

Re: BVT Results Google Page -

t; Will need to little time close on this - please bear with me while this > get this streamlined! > > Cheers, > Raja > -Original Message- > From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2016 3:48 PM > To: dev > Subject: Re: BVT

Re: BVT Results Google Page -

I like this initial shot at it Raja. As an added request, I would like to see some logic in the colors. Now it seems 90% is a threshold and this obscures that the coverage went down from monday to tuesday on xenserver basiczone. Also Xenserver with advanced zonegrew to the highest coverage level on

Re: LTS release or not

ok, one last €0,01: any bug should be fixed not on the branch but on the commit it was introduced in and thenn be merged forward. It can then be merged into any branch that contains the offending commit and there is no longer any difference between LTS or anything else. Am I speaking Kardeshian? I

Re: Summary: -1 LTS

(rant alert) I have been stating this in the discuss thread and I don't agree with your conclusion; with our new workflow any release is a LTS as long as we maintain the discipline of allowing only bugfixes on the release they first appeared in (or 4.6 as a start point) If we maintain that discipli

Re: LTS release or not

gt; > >Exactly, we can say we want an LTS, but then we need a RM. > > > >and FWIW, I would think we want to LTS starting with 4.6.2. > > > >We need to make sure all upgrade to 4.6.2 work and start there. > > > >The reason being that subsequent upgrad

Re: LTS release or not

; -- > > Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! > > > > Nux! > > www.nux.ro > > > > - Original Message - > >> From: "Daan Hoogland" > >> To: "dev" > >> Sent: Monday, 11 January, 2016 13:36:06 &

Re: LTS release or not

using Borg technology! > > Nux! > www.nux.ro > > - Original Message - > > From: "Daan Hoogland" > > To: "dev" > > Sent: Monday, 11 January, 2016 13:19:48 > > Subject: Re: LTS release or not > > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 7:58 A

Re: [DISCUSS] Move to Github

Ok, nice to see we have in the open what possible problems are. That said and as we are, my experience as RM leads me to say we should move sooner rather then later. explenation of my not always 100% clear communication methods: :+1:!!! On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 12:43 PM, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:

Re: LTS release or not

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 7:58 AM, Rene Moser wrote: > >> * Fix must be important. > >> > > > > Who defines what 'important' is? > > "must be important" means we do not backport trivial things like typos > in docs and so forth, only important things. And I would say important > in a common sense. B

Re: gitlab.apache.org

looking at AsterixDB and > Impala and see how they are making use of Gerrit. > > --David > > On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 3:25 AM, Daan Hoogland > wrote: > > We, cloudstack-dev-list-users have been talking about moving more > > functionality to github. This is being rejected

Re: [DISCUSS] Move to Github

gt; still maintain strong provenance of commits to keep the high quality and > > provenance standards of ASF code. > > > > > > If we get consensus we can request to the board to be part of the > > “trial” and move to Github. > > > > > >> On Dec

Re: LTS release or not

Rene, I would advice to support 4.7 as LTS. It adheres to the new development/release process unlike 4.5 and any bugfixes there can automatically be merged forward to newer releases to reduce the chance of regression. I am in favour of the general concept. On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 12:12 AM, Rubens

Re: What happened to the Jenkins CI test on PRs?

communication seems flaky. Later jobs have run. 1316 was the last one and it completed successfully but didn't report back to github. 1315 did report back, though. I entered a ticket: INFRA-11058. On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 12:22 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote: > Remi, it shouldn't have be

Re: What happened to the Jenkins CI test on PRs?

Remi, it shouldn't have been. I'll look at it. On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 8:38 PM, Remi Bergsma wrote: > Hi, > > What happened to the Jenkins test on PRs? It seems PR 1287 was the last > one to have both Travis CI and Jenkins. Since then, it’s only Travis CI. > > Why was it removed? (did I miss the

Re: gitlab.apache.org

Jan 8, 2016 at 2:32 PM, Wido den Hollander wrote: > > > On 08-01-16 09:25, Daan Hoogland wrote: > > We, cloudstack-dev-list-users have been talking about moving more > > functionality to github. This is being rejected by the foundation so far > > for (in my view obv

gitlab.apache.org

We, cloudstack-dev-list-users have been talking about moving more functionality to github. This is being rejected by the foundation so far for (in my view obvious) reasons of governance. The functionality is however missed dearly so speaking with an ex-member he suggested we install a machine with

Re: Minor releases!

one other remark: no matter what our release scheme, we need for every one to do twice as much reviews as contributions in order for our present way of working to be successful. And in this doing a review means sticking with a PR until it is good enough to go in, not just make initial remarks. We h

Re: Minor releases!

​I totally agree Marcus, with one small addition. In our present scheme we can mark any 4.x as LTS if we maintain the discipline ​of fixing any bug on the oldest version known to contain the bug and merge the fix forward. some LIMITATION OF WARRANTY (tm) apply of course; if a fix requires some kin

Re: BVT Report for the week of 1/5

Raja, thanks. I hve one question: can you produce historic data? preferable graphical so I can kid myself I understand it ;) On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 11:13 AM, Raja Pullela wrote: > Happy New Year to all! > > Please see the BVT report > KVM Basic - 97.1% > XS Basic - 94.0% > KVM Adv - 85.8% - act

Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9132: API createVolume takes e...

Remi, If a fix can be made agains 4.6, let's do that. Merging forward is no biggy and we'll be helping more people this way. On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 10:39 AM, remibergsma wrote: > Github user remibergsma commented on the pull request: > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1273#issueco

Re: Upcoming releases: ACS 4.7.1 / 4.8.0

On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Remi Bergsma wrote: > My point was to do only 4.7.1 instead of two like we did with 4.6. > ​makes sense​ -- Daan

Re: Upcoming releases: ACS 4.7.1 / 4.8.0

On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 12:26 PM, Rohit Yadav wrote: > On 29-Dec-2015, at 11:38 PM, Wido den Hollander wrote: > > Seems like a good thing to me. The shorter the release cycles become, > the less need there is for a point release imho. > > > Agree with Wido, there is probably no need for a point

Re: Jira permissions

On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Dag Sonstebo wrote: > dagsonstebo ​all hail the new scrumm master​ -- Daan

Re: Let’s discuss database upgrades

l be available. > > In projects that I have run, a change to the database required a new major > release so a single conversion will take one from 4.5.x to 4.6.x > > The nice thing about release numbers is that one never runs out! > > Ron > > > > On 29/12/2015 10:08 A

Re: Let’s discuss database upgrades

e a page on the wiki so I can add > everything we discuss and agree upon here? This way, we could add that page > to the guidelines for devs creating PRs and committers reviewing and > merging them. > > On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Wido den Hollander > wrote: > > > >

Re: Let’s discuss database upgrades

By this I meant I'm fine with any decision the implementer makes, btw. We will encounter the administrative issues with it and deal with them. On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote: > Wido, Rafael, > > I like the date-format but then of course CCYY-MM-DD. I can

Re: Let’s discuss database upgrades

; > routines. This way the idea of running all of the routines in between > > > version during upgrades could be applied. > > > > > > > Same goes for giving all database changes a simple numeric int which > > keeps incrementing each time a change i

Re: Let’s discuss database upgrades

Rafael, On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 12:22 PM, Rafael Weingärtner < rafaelweingart...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks, Daan and Wido for your contributions, I will discuss them as > follows. > > Daan, about the idea of per commit upgrades. Do you mean that we separate > each change in the database that is

Re: Let’s discuss database upgrades

€0,02: I think it is important to support per commit upgrades, so I not with Wido on this at all. Looking at your naming scheme that might be a problem. Other then this your initial proposal seems fine. The reason is not to allow for x.y.z schema changes but to be able to decide a certain commit g

Re: master marvin install problem

after some time or manually install that package. > > > > Thanks, > > ~Talluri > > > > On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Daan Hoogland > > wrote: > > > >> People, > >> > >> I tried to install marvin 4.8.0-SNAPSHOT this afternoon

master marvin install problem

People, I tried to install marvin 4.8.0-SNAPSHOT this afternoon and found mysql-connector-python missing from pypi. Is this expected? I tried last week and everything was dandy. -- Daan

Re: Build failed in Jenkins: build-master-slowbuild #2783

On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 7:20 AM, Sateesh Chodapuneedi < sateesh.chodapune...@citrix.com> wrote: > Daan, > Shall fix those listed in following. But unable to logon to > Jenkins.buildacloud.org, can you please help with login? > >

Re: Results of a IPv6 brainstorm day

Wido, consider me in. My main objective btw is to give users the possibility to run there VMs IPv6 only. The management layer is not such a biggy. I am still reading up on those rfcs and all the links in them. On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Wido den Hollander wrote: > > > On 12/22/2015 04:35

Re: [DISCUSS] Move to Github

Sebastien, This will create a github repo under the apache organisation right? one that we can not merge to. On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Sebastien Goasguen wrote: > BTW > > Anyone can ask for a new git repo which will be mirrored on github at: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/servicedesk

Re: Protocol to add scripts to a newer version of ACS

t from my iPhone > > > On 21 Dec 2015, at 07:51, Daan Hoogland wrote: > > > > H Rafael, just make a PR. the 4.7.0 should serve as a proper example. > > > > On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 10:19 PM, Rafael Weingärtner < > > rafaelweingart...@gmail.com> wrote: >

Re: Protocol to add scripts to a newer version of ACS

H Rafael, just make a PR. the 4.7.0 should serve as a proper example. On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 10:19 PM, Rafael Weingärtner < rafaelweingart...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi guys, > > I am working on a PR that will require some data to be added to > “guest_os_hypervisor” table. However, there is no “*to4

Re: Build failed in Jenkins: build-master-slowbuild #2783

Sateesh, Rohit, Abhi, Can you guys look at the 5 new warnings? These are in your contributions. On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 1:09 PM, wrote: > See > > -- > [...truncated 28722 lines...] > [INFO

Re: RM wanted

ng merge one-liners and sending vote mails. > > Regards, Remi > > > On 18 Dec 2015, at 10:40, Daan Hoogland wrote: > > > > H all, > > > > For 4.8 we need RMs. I will not continue with this job and if Remi does, > he > > shouldn't be on his

<    3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   >