Chip,
My vote: +1 (binding)
Thanks for allowing the extension. Hadn't had time to run the complete set of
tests. Results here are posted for Advanced Zone with KVM in one cluster and
XenServer in another. I took the chance to run some additional tests for
regression, some are still running.
On 06/01/2013 02:10 PM, Chip Childers wrote:
Thanks! I'll close the vote out this afternoon (US ET).
-1
manager will not start due to recent updated tomcat6 RPMS in distros.
The reason is an upgrade to tomcat6 in yum distros;
* Wed May 15 2013 David Knox dk...@redhat.com 0:6.0.24-55
-
On Tue, May 28, 2013, at 08:47 AM, Chip Childers wrote:
For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to
indicate (binding) with their vote?
[ ] +1 approve
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
+1 (binding)
Best,
jzb
--
Joe Brockmeier
j...@zonker.net
@cloudstack.apache.org
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 8:47:40 AM
Subject: [VOTE] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
Hi All,
I've created a 4.1.0 release, with the following artifacts up for a
vote.
The changes from round 4 are related to DEB packaging, some
translation strings
On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 9:47 AM, Chip Childers
chip.child...@sungard.com wrote:
Hi All,
I've created a 4.1.0 release, with the following artifacts up for a
vote.
+1
Checked sigs and hashes
Built
Packaged RPMs for EL6.4 (using nonoss profile)
Did some basic testing
--David
Uh, we may have a problem. I deployed a fresh 4.1 two days ago, it
worked, and then I deployed current 4.1 on a separate test system (on
top of existing, but redeployed the db) and got this:
2013-05-30 09:51:30,975 ERROR [cloud.async.AsyncJobManagerImpl]
(Job-Executor-19:job-19) Unexpected
cc'ing prachi
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 09:59:01AM -0600, Marcus Sorensen wrote:
Uh, we may have a problem. I deployed a fresh 4.1 two days ago, it
worked, and then I deployed current 4.1 on a separate test system (on
top of existing, but redeployed the db) and got this:
2013-05-30
I think we need to add an 'mvn clean' to the cloud.spec prior to
building. Normally, I can build RPMs, do a pull or change some code,
then build RPMs, and the changes are reflected and everything is fine.
However, after running 'git clean -fxd', then rebuilding the same
code, reinstalling, the
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:23:31AM -0600, Marcus Sorensen wrote:
I think we need to add an 'mvn clean' to the cloud.spec prior to
building. Normally, I can build RPMs, do a pull or change some code,
then build RPMs, and the changes are reflected and everything is fine.
However, after running
. (WAS: [VOTE] Release Apache
CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round))
Ilya,
I'm breaking off a new thread for this discussion. If you want to discuss the
design options presented in the jira, this would be a good thread for that.
;-)
-chip
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 06:24:27PM +, Musayev, Ilya wrote
...@sungard.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 2:30 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: [DISCUSS] How to best do time sync. (WAS: [VOTE] Release Apache
CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round))
Ilya,
I'm breaking off a new thread for this discussion. If you want to discuss
the
design options
:48 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: Prachi Damle
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:23:31AM -0600, Marcus Sorensen wrote:
I think we need to add an 'mvn clean' to the cloud.spec prior to
building. Normally, I can build RPMs, do
).
-Original Message-
From: John Burwell [mailto:jburw...@basho.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 1:02 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] How to best do time sync. (WAS: [VOTE] Release
Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round))
Ilya,
One very important note
30, 2013 1:02 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] How to best do time sync. (WAS: [VOTE] Release
Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round))
Ilya,
One very important note is that NTP is only used for Xen. For KVM and
VMWare, time sync is accomplished through kernel
, except that as you say cleaning the repository
is needed.
-Prachi
-Original Message-
From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 9:48 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: Prachi Damle
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth
. (WAS: [VOTE] Release
Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round))
Ilya,
One very important note is that NTP is only used for Xen. For KVM and
VMWare, time sync is accomplished through kernel drivers/system
daemons
with NTP configured in the hypervisor configuration. Therefore, this
model
time sync. (WAS: [VOTE] Release
Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round))
IIya,
I can't speak to KVM, but on VMWare, clock sync won't work without tools.
It's not an option.
Thanks,
-John
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Musayev, Ilya imusa...@webmd.net
wrote:
I'd say Cluster
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 06:14:04PM +, Musayev, Ilya wrote:
John,
For vmware, you have 2 options, clock sync will work with native NTP daemon
using local ntp servers in your datacenter or use vmware tools native time
keeping technique.
We have over 2500 VMs, and while we have vmware
: Musayev, Ilya [mailto:imusa...@webmd.net]
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 2:14 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] How to best do time sync. (WAS: [VOTE] Release
Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round))
John,
For vmware, you have 2 options, clock sync will work with native NTP
to best do time sync. (WAS: [VOTE] Release
Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round))
John,
For vmware, you have 2 options, clock sync will work with native NTP
daemon using local ntp servers in your datacenter or use vmware tools
native time keeping technique.
We have over 2500 VMs, and while we
-Original Message-
From: Noah Slater [mailto:nsla...@apache.org]
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 11:38 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
John, note that releases are majority approval, so -1 votes are not
vetos
Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
John, note that releases are majority approval, so -1 votes are not
vetos.
We'd only abort the vote if we failed to get three binding +1 votes, or
there were more -1 votes than +1 votes.
[Animesh] Noah thanks for clarifying, can you point me
-Original Message-
From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 3:24 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
Check the by laws for the project.
[Animesh] Thanks Chip
On May 30
Hello,
+1
Tested on CentOS 6.4 + KVM + CLVM
Build RPM with success on CentOS 6.4
Milamber
Le 28/05/2013 14:47, Chip Childers a ecrit :
Hi All,
I've created a 4.1.0 release, with the following artifacts up for a
vote.
The changes from round 4 are related to DEB packaging, some
translation
+1 (binding)
Since the changes are only Deb related in this case I'm basing my vote
on previous rounds.
I verified the Deb packages this time and both the Management server and
AWS API install cleanly now.
I'm not an expert on the AWS API, but I see the Mgmt server listening on
port 7080.
+1 (binding)
On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 7:47 AM, Chip Childers
chip.child...@sungard.com wrote:
Hi All,
I've created a 4.1.0 release, with the following artifacts up for a
vote.
The changes from round 4 are related to DEB packaging, some
translation strings, and a functional patch to make
John,
I clearly see your concern, please review my response under CLOUDSTACK-2492.
Thanks
ilya
-Original Message-
From: John Burwell [mailto:jburw...@basho.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 10:10 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0
response under CLOUDSTACK-2492.
Thanks
ilya
-Original Message-
From: John Burwell [mailto:jburw...@basho.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 10:10 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
-0. I don't believe we should
John, note that releases are majority approval, so -1 votes are not vetos.
We'd only abort the vote if we failed to get three binding +1 votes, or
there were more -1 votes than +1 votes.
On 29 May 2013 15:09, John Burwell jburw...@basho.com wrote:
-0. I don't believe we should be shipping a
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 07:37:59PM +0100, Noah Slater wrote:
John, note that releases are majority approval, so -1 votes are not vetos.
We'd only abort the vote if we failed to get three binding +1 votes, or
there were more -1 votes than +1 votes.
Or if there was something horribly wrong that
Or that... ;) Generally, the RM is free to abort for any reason! (Though,
typically, we'd expect it to be a good one.)
On 29 May 2013 19:39, Chip Childers chip.child...@sungard.com wrote:
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 07:37:59PM +0100, Noah Slater wrote:
John, note that releases are majority
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 07:41:08PM +0100, Noah Slater wrote:
Or that... ;) Generally, the RM is free to abort for any reason! (Though,
typically, we'd expect it to be a good one.)
Yeah, that's just my personal bar. ;)
On 29 May 2013 19:39, Chip Childers chip.child...@sungard.com wrote:
Hi All,
I've created a 4.1.0 release, with the following artifacts up for a
vote.
The changes from round 4 are related to DEB packaging, some
translation strings, and a functional patch to make bridge type
optional during the agent setup (for backward compatibility).
Git Branch and Commit SH:
+1 binding.
-Original Message-
From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 9:48 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: [VOTE] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
Hi All,
I've created a 4.1.0 release, with the following
+1
Tested with Management Sever on CentOS 6.4 and Xen
-Original Message-
From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 6:48 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: [VOTE] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
Hi All,
I've created
+1, tested on the same environment and at the same time.
-Original Message-
From: Animesh Chaturvedi [mailto:animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 6:08 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: RE: [VOTE] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
+1
36 matches
Mail list logo
