I am cancelling the fourth VOTE which was already approved because of later
discovery of 4.1.1 to 4.2 upgrade path not working [1]. The fix is available
and is being tested. I will start another VOTE round later today or tomorrow
morning. I will also pick the CLVM fix
[1] https://issues.apa
ilders [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 9:05 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
>
> On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Mathias Mullins
> wrote:
>
> > Technically I don't see any binding -1 vetoes being de
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 12:58:52PM +, Mathias Mullins wrote:
> Was trying to help a non-bias party. :-)
Yup, and we appreciate it Matt.
Ah, Thanks for clarifying Chip, wasn't super clear in the by-laws the way
they are written. So I wasn't sure how to write it.
I totally agree with you that all votes are important, the only reason I
focused on the PMC votes is because we seemed to be getting completely off
base about getting the r
.
-Original Message-
From: Marcus Sorensen [mailto:shadow...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 8:01 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
Sorry, I should have declared my vote as binding, I meant to.
That's great news
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Mathias Mullins
wrote:
> Technically I don't see any binding -1 vetoes being declared. Animesh is
> correct on this.
>
>
I don't have to write "Binding" next to my vote. Votes are technically
"binding" when the person voting is considered to have binding vote.
Also
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 5:12 PM, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
>
> On Sep 9, 2013, at 5:08 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi <
> animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >>
> >> On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Sebastien Goasguen
> >> wrote:
> >>> Maybe before we get to carried away talking about future rel
iginal Message-----
> From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 1:48 PM
> To: dev
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
>
> Why can't we cover every use case, Marcus. We will need help from users,
> but if they
ent: Tuesday, September 03, 2013 9:43 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
>
>
>
> I've created a 4.2.0 release, with the following artifacts up for a
> vote:
>
> Git Branch and Commit SH:
> https://git-wi
board. If people can pick these up and help to review
, fix and submit it would help everyone.
-Original Message-
From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 1:48 PM
To: dev
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
Why can'
do not upgrade until it has been
>> fixed).
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Chiradeep Vittal <
>> >>>> chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I know we're trying to hit timed releases, but I think it's very
>>>>> important to preserve key underlying functionality across releases. If a
>>>>> supported and documented feature is known to be br
ant to preserve key underlying functionality across releases. If a
>> >supported and documented feature is known to be broken, we need to
>> >address it...if we don't, it's going to cause lots of pain, and reflect
>> >badly on ACS as a project.
>> >
> >I know we're trying to hit timed releases, but I think it's very
>>> >important to preserve key underlying functionality across releases. If a
>>> >supported and documented feature is known to be broken, we need to
>>> >address it...if we don't, it's going t
> -Original Message-
> From: Animesh Chaturvedi [mailto:animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 2:04 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
>
>
>
> > -Original Messag
>>> >I know we're trying to hit timed releases, but I think it's very
>>>> >important to preserve key underlying functionality across releases. If a
>>>> >supported and documented feature is known to be broken, we need to
>>>> &g
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 9/9/13 7:42 AM, "Simon Weller" wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> -1 from me as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know we're trying to hit tim
to preserve key underlying functionality across releases. If a
>> >supported and documented feature is known to be broken, we need to
>> >address it...if we don't, it's going to cause lots of pain, and reflect
>> >badly on ACS as a project.
>> >
>> &g
>>> chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I think that Animesh is trying to stress what is "key". If it hits
> >>>>> 1% of cloud operators is it key?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>&
gt; On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Chiradeep Vittal <
>>>>>> chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think that Animesh is trying to stress what is "key". If it hits
>>>>>>> 1% of cloud
> -Original Message-
> From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 1:46 PM
> To: dev
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
>
> I think we are hitting a well documented feature of open source here,
cloud operators is it key?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 9/9/13 7:42 AM, "Simon Weller" wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> -1 from me as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know we&#
feature is known to be broken, we need to
> >address it...if we don't, it's going to cause lots of pain, and reflect
> >badly on ACS as a project.
> >
> >- Original Message -
> >
> >From: "Chip Childers"
> >To: dev@cloudstack.apa
> -Original Message-
> From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 11:50 AM
> To: dev
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
>
> Animesh,
>
> Without wanting to pass judgement on the qu
> -Original Message-
> From: Marcus Sorensen [mailto:shadow...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 11:10 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
>
> We just need to have basic automated testing of
: "Chip Childers"
>To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>Sent: Monday, September 9, 2013 9:24:23 AM
>Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
>
>On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 12:40:30AM -0600, Marcus Sorensen wrote:
>> -1 ... sorry guys, especially with Simon chim
day, September 09, 2013 11:10 AM
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
> >
> > We just need to have basic automated testing of every core supported
> > platform. With 4.1 we released a product that didn't
Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 8:31 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi
wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Marcus Sorensen [mailto:shadow...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 11:10 AM
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStac
g.
Draw the line somewhere.
--
Chiradeep
On 9/9/13 10:51 AM, "Animesh Chaturvedi"
wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
>> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 8:25 AM
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.or
> -Original Message-
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 8:25 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
>
> On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 10:42:48AM -0400, Simon
ng.
>>
>> Draw the line somewhere.
>> --
>> Chiradeep
>>
>>
>> On 9/9/13 10:51 AM, "Animesh Chaturvedi"
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >> -Original Message-
>> >> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip
>
> On 9/9/13 10:51 AM, "Animesh Chaturvedi"
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> >> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 8:25 AM
> >> To: dev@cloudstack.ap
ders [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> > Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 8:25 AM
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 10:42:48AM -0400, Simon Weller wrote:
> > > -1
...@sungard.com]
> > > Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 8:25 AM
> > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 10:42:48AM -0400, Simon Weller wrote:
> > >
On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 10:42:48AM -0400, Simon Weller wrote:
> -1 from me as well.
>
>
> I know we're trying to hit timed releases, but I think it's very important to
> preserve key underlying functionality across releases. If a supported and
> documented feature is known to be broken, we nee
se lots of pain, and reflect badly on ACS as a project.
- Original Message -
From: "Chip Childers"
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Sent: Monday, September 9, 2013 9:24:23 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 12:40:30AM -0600
On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 12:40:30AM -0600, Marcus Sorensen wrote:
> -1 ... sorry guys, especially with Simon chiming in.
>
> I'd request f2c5b5fbfe45196dfad2821fca513ddd6efa25c9 be cherry-picked.
Agreed.
I'm -1, given simon's perspective as well. Since we have the fix, let's
get it into the rele
t;>>> -Original Message-
>>>>> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
>>>>> Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 10:21 AM
>>>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0
>>>
>>>
>>>> -Original Message-
>>>> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
>>>> Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 10:21 AM
>>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Clou
ent: Friday, September 06, 2013 10:21 AM
>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
>>>
>>> Animesh,
>>>
>>> I'd ask that this vote stay open until EOD Monday. I've tested t
It's fixed on 4.2-forward branch, I tested it on my local machine already.
> -Original Message-
> From: Simon Weller [mailto:swel...@ena.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 3:25 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourt
On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 08:18:35PM +, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> > Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 10:21 AM
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject
we have to assume the worst.
> > On Sep 6, 2013 2:55 PM, "Chip Childers"
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 08:18:35PM +, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > -Original Message-----
> > &
---
> > From: Marcus Sorensen [mailto:shadow...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 2:32 PM
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
> >
> > I don't use CLVM any more, and I have no idea how m
tested before midday Monday. I did
start building the first RC, but packaging was still broken...then I got
sidetracked.
- Original Message -
From: "Marcus Sorensen"
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Sent: Friday, September 6, 2013 5:08:53 PM
Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache CloudS
rensen [mailto:shadow...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 2:32 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
>
> I don't use CLVM any more, and I have no idea how many people do. I'm
> relatively certain that some
edi wrote:
> >
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> > > Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 10:21 AM
> > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (f
> -Original Message-
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 10:21 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
>
> On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 04:43:16AM +, Ani
On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 04:43:16AM +, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
>
>
> I've created a 4.2.0 release, with the following artifacts up for a
> vote:
>
> Git Branch and Commit SH:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.2
> Commit: e39a7d8e0d3f2fd3e32
+1 (binding)
The marvin integration tests were fixed by several folks this last
month. And the results of those tests shows good stability. Failures
in tests are known but overall a good indicator for release. Some failures were
because of capacity constraints on the test infrastructure. All tests
+1
Testing done in OEL64*/KVM environment using a small foot print OEL64 VM
image with userdata and reporting to central server to verify that VMs
comes up properly. KVM hosts are 32 core / 256 GByte RAM / 1GBit /
localstorage on fast RAID (8x600G;RAID5). Manager runs in VirtualBox
with local
Subject: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
I've created a 4.2.0 release, with the following artifacts up for a
vote:
Git Branch and Commit SH:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.2
Commit: e39a7d8e0d3f2fd3e326b1bdf4aaf9ba5d900b02
Li
+1.
Tested all steps in the release procedure.
On 9/3/13 9:43 PM, "Animesh Chaturvedi"
wrote:
>
>
>I've created a 4.2.0 release, with the following artifacts up for a
>vote:
>
>Git Branch and Commit SH:
>https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs
>/heads/4.2
>Com
I've created a 4.2.0 release, with the following artifacts up for a
vote:
Git Branch and Commit SH:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.2
Commit: e39a7d8e0d3f2fd3e326b1bdf4aaf9ba5d900b02
List of changes:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=
54 matches
Mail list logo
