> On Jul 9, 2015, at 3:27 PM, David Nalley wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 4:49 AM, Rohit Yadav
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 09-Jul-2015, at 12:50 pm, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
>>
>> Let’s revert , that’s our new rule
>>
>>
>> Since we have not voted what/how we are going to do commits, let’s tr
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 4:49 AM, Rohit Yadav
wrote:
>
> On 09-Jul-2015, at 12:50 pm, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
>
> Let’s revert , that’s our new rule
>
>
> Since we have not voted what/how we are going to do commits, let’s treat
> this more of a guideline or honour code.
>
Votes aren't strictl
On 09-Jul-2015, at 12:50 pm, Sebastien Goasguen
mailto:run...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Let’s revert , that’s our new rule
Since we have not voted what/how we are going to do commits, let’s treat this
more of a guideline or honour code.
I’ve expressed few concersn on this rule wrt code reviewing for
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 8:44 AM, pavanb018 wrote:
> looks good to me
pavanb018 you probably should write LGTM ;)
--
Daan
> On Jul 9, 2015, at 4:45 AM, Rajani Karuturi wrote:
>
> PR #565 is also closed with one review.
>
> I dont agree to adding an exception. Reviewing would be one way to get
> others engaged and become aware. Otherwise, they lay there untouched and
> unused.
>
Let’s revert , that’s our new rule
Github user pavanb018 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/567#issuecomment-119841442
The commit looks good to me
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does no
PR #565 is also closed with one review.
I dont agree to adding an exception. Reviewing would be one way to get
others engaged and become aware. Otherwise, they lay there untouched and
unused.
I am sure we have enough committers who can review. Lately, lot more folks
are adding marvin tests as wel
More tests are good, on the other hand exceptions tend to beget
exceptions at tremendous speed.
On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 7:48 AM, Daan Hoogland wrote:
> That was never formalized, hence I put it as a shakespearian question.
> I did sugest it otherwise I would have just reverted. I don't like the
>
That was never formalized, hence I put it as a shakespearian question.
I did sugest it otherwise I would have just reverted. I don't like the
exception but if the number of people working on integration is to low
to have a good flow we could.
On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Sanjeev N wrote:
> I t
I thought there is a limitation on LGTMs for integration tests?
On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 5:11 PM, Daan Hoogland
wrote:
> guys and dolss,
>
> this was closed with only 1 LGTM! we agreed not to submit with less
> then two ok reviews on master. So next steps? revert? some extra
> justification or els
guys and dolss,
this was closed with only 1 LGTM! we agreed not to submit with less
then two ok reviews on master. So next steps? revert? some extra
justification or else revert? .
On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 12:39 PM, asfgit wrote:
> Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
>
> https:/
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/567
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is
Github user sanju1010 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/567#issuecomment-119536872
LGTM!!
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
GitHub user nitt10prashant opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/567
CLOUDSTACK-8583 : fixing issue related to script test/integration/comâ¦
issue
---
Few testcases are failing because of unsupported storage type .Deploy vm
with data disk is
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/518
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is
GitHub user nitt10prashant opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/518
CLOUDSTACK-8583 :fixing issue related to script test_stopped_vm
ested
Test Deploy Virtual Machine with startVM=true parameter ... === TestName:
test_02_deploy_vm_
16 matches
Mail list logo
