Folks,
We need to freeze 4.6 asap.
I originally agreed to RM 4.6 and Daan also stepped up.
But I would like to work on doing a release of ec2stack and gcestack, so I will
step down from 4.6 RM.
Anybody wants to jump in.
There is already a ton of things in 4.6 and we need to release.
Ideally
Just checking JIRA, we have 5 blockers for 4.6:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-8920 - not assigned
KVM agent cannot communicate with server on port 8250
The other 4 are assigned and being worked on.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-8915 - assigned to Wilder
Hi Seb
On 08.06.2015 21:43, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
> We need to freeze 4.6 asap.
Oh boy, you are way too fast :)
How many days will I have to finish
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/264 ?
And a more serious issue: The changes made in
https://issues.apache.org/jira/bro
Hi Sebastien,
> On 08-Jun-2015, at 9:43 pm, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
>
> We need to freeze 4.6 asap.
Good idea. Can you suggest a hard date though, say first week of July? This
will buy us some time to merge on-going efforts, review and merge pending PRs
and fix critical issues shar
Hi,
I can jump in and work with Rohit and Daan to make 4.6 happen.
+1 for the QA on master. It would be best if we could then all focus on
stabilizing 4.6 aka master and wait with refactor stuff and new features until
4.6 is out, which is the start of 4.7.
On the other hand, building new
You guys can also count on me for whatever help you need to make it happen
smoothly :)
On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 11:45 PM, Remi Bergsma wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I can jump in and work with Rohit and Daan to make 4.6 happen.
>
> +1 for the QA on master. It would be best if we could th
On Jun 8, 2015, at 11:45 PM, Remi Bergsma wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I can jump in and work with Rohit and Daan to make 4.6 happen.
>
> +1 for the QA on master. It would be best if we could then all focus on
> stabilizing 4.6 aka master and wait with refactor stuff and new features
non-committers,
this freeze could cause unnecessary frustration and discourage further
contributions.
Thanks,
-John
From: sebgoa
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2015 6:33 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: 4.6
On Jun 8, 2015, at 11:45 PM, Remi
ns only the RMs will commit on master. any PR from anyone welcome
and let the discussions happen on whether to merge or not…no frustration.
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
>
> From: sebgoa
> Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2015 6:33 AM
> To: dev@
frustration.
>
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -John
>>
>>
>> From: sebgoa
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2015 6:33 AM
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: 4.6
>>
>> On Jun 8, 2015, at 11:45
ce they can manage their
> branches in the cloudstack repo. However, for non-committers, this freeze
> could cause unnecessary frustration and discourage further contributions.
> >
> > A freeze means only the RMs will commit on master. any PR from anyone
> welcome and let the discussi
t;>
>>>
>>>> For committers, it is not a big deal since they can manage their
>> branches in the cloudstack repo. However, for non-committers, this freeze
>> could cause unnecessary frustration and discourage further contributions.
>>>
>>> A
I want the developers to take it onto themselves
> >> to keep their forks in sync with master, develop on their fork. And I
> want
> >> master to be the release branch. We will be able to build up a release
> >> through PR from devs with limited merge conflicts. So that we reach a
&
On Jun 22, 2015, at 2:55 PM, Rafael Fonseca wrote:
> Hi Sebastien, thx for following up so quickly :)
>
> It's because it's a big change that i think it should be done in a major
> release an not a minor,
We all agree on this. Such as change is for a major release.
The
d be done in
>> a major release an not a minor,
>
> We all agree on this. Such as change is for a major release.
>
> The question is 4.6 or 4.7 ...
>
To bring this up, if we go for 4.6, then that's OK.
The other discussion is if we move to Java 8 as well.
So Jetty + Ja
Guys,
I'm out and about this morning, but I've noticed that the release notes state
that baseurl for 4.6 is http://cloudstack.apt-get.eu/rhel/4.5/
And that somewhat buried in the vmware install information is the fact that the
apt-get repo only includes the oss build.
1. I fun
The 4.6.0 announcement is out, please take 5 minutes to promote on social media:
- NASDAQ GlobeNewswire
http://globenewswire.com/news-release/2015/12/01/791835/0/en/The-Apache-Software-Foundation-announces-Apache-CloudStack-v4-6.html
- ASF "Foundation" blog http://s.apache.org/VfP
- @TheASF Twitt
Hey all,
Just checking the schedule. Sticking to the fourth month release cycle means
that the feature freeze for 4.5 is coming up really fast.
The feature freeze for 4.4 was March 19
That makes the feature freeze date for 4.5 July 19
And the feature freeze for 4.6 November 19
Do we have any
well and help knowing what endup into
hotfixe releases (4.4.1,4.4.2).
So, I'd like to propose to change few things on how we contribute for 4.6
releases.
1. emphasis github pull request, merge request, no direct commit into 4.6
branch unless it's minor changes.
2. improve CI, start
Thanks Boris(@borisroman) for fixing 3 blockers.
We now have 7 blockers for the 4.6 release
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Dashboard.jspa?selectPageId=12326765
T Key P Summary Assignee Creator [image: Bug]
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-8881> CLOUDSTACK-8881
(resending in plain text)
Thanks Boris(@borisroman) for fixing 3 blockers.
We now have 7 blockers for the 4.6 release
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Dashboard.jspa?selectPageId=12326765
Key Summary Assignee Creator
CLOUDSTACK-8881[Blocker] PF , static nat , LB , egress
Hi Sebastien,
We are able to use ACS + KVM for a while and I have not faced such a problem as
described on CLOUDSTACK-8920
Just as a reminder, we have several tests executed agains KVM with ACS 4.6 on
Sunday… all went fine.
Cheers,
Wilder
> On 29 Sep 2015, at 13:36, Sebastien Goasg
igues" wrote:
>Hi Sebastien,
>
>We are able to use ACS + KVM for a while and I have not faced such a problem
>as described on CLOUDSTACK-8920
>
>Just as a reminder, we have several tests executed agains KVM with ACS 4.6 on
>Sunday… all went fine.
>
>Cheers,
&g
logy!
Nux!
www.nux.ro
- Original Message -
> From: "Sebastien Goasguen"
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org, "Raja Pullela"
> Sent: Tuesday, 29 September, 2015 12:36:17
> Subject: 4.6 blockers
> Just checking JIRA, we have 5 blockers for 4.6:
>
> https://
t; www.nux.ro
>
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Sebastien Goasguen"
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org, "Raja Pullela"
>> Sent: Tuesday, 29 September, 2015 12:36:17
>> Subject: 4.6 blockers
>
>> Just checking JIRA, we have 5 blockers fo
pache.org
> Cc: "Raja Pullela"
> Sent: Tuesday, 29 September, 2015 14:25:45
> Subject: Re: 4.6 blockers
> Go one, Nux!
>
> We haven’t tested the UI for a while! All advanced/basic zones I have created
> are done via Marvin.
>
> Will add that to the list for nex
es"
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Cc: "Raja Pullela"
>> Sent: Tuesday, 29 September, 2015 14:25:45
>> Subject: Re: 4.6 blockers
>
>> Go one, Nux!
>>
>> We haven’t tested the UI for a while! All advanced/basic zones I have created
&
logy!
Nux!
www.nux.ro
- Original Message -
> From: "Wilder Rodrigues"
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Cc: "Raja Pullela"
> Sent: Tuesday, 29 September, 2015 17:34:38
> Subject: Re: 4.6 blockers
> Hi Lucian,
>
> I’m testing Master on a dail
As per the latest BVT reports, CLOUDSTACK-8876 should also be a blocker.
I am bumping the priority of it.
~Rajani
On 29-Sep-2015, at 5:06 pm, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
> Just checking JIRA, we have 5 blockers for 4.6:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-8920 - not
>
> ~Rajani
>
>
>
> On 29-Sep-2015, at 5:06 pm, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
>
>> Just checking JIRA, we have 5 blockers for 4.6:
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-8920 - not assigned
>> KVM agent cannot communicate with serv
to knock off blockers in this week and create RC
next week.
~Rajani
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Rajani Karuturi wrote:
> (resending in plain text)
>
> Thanks Boris(@borisroman) for fixing 3 blockers.
>
> We now have 7 blockers for the 4.6 release
> https://issues.apac
Ladies & Gents,
I've just tried installing the current 4.6 from Jenkins on CentOS 7 it fails to
start the management service completely (Failed at step EXEC spawning
/usr/sbin/tomcat-sysd: No such file or directory) I've updated
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-
ev@cloudstack.apache.org>"
Subject: Re: 4.6 release
Ladies & Gents,
I’ve just tried installing the current 4.6 from Jenkins on CentOS 7 it fails to
start the management service completely (Failed at step EXEC spawning
/usr/sbin/tomcat-sysd: No such file or directory) I’ve updated
h
Hi,
We’re down to a single blocker:
1) CentOS 7 - systemd-tmpfiles - Operation not permitted
This is about the CentOS 7 packaging of the Management Server.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-8812
PRs for 4.6
===
If you have PRs that should go into 4.6, please ping me or
Folks,
As we prepare to try a new process for 4.6 release it would be nice to start
paying attention to master.
- Good commit messages
- Reference to a JIRA bug
- Squashing commits ( cc/ wilder :))
While you can apply patches directly, good practice is to apply the patch to a
branch and then
Hi,
I've create this jira filter[1] for the Release Manager, based on it, there
would be only 4 maybe just 3 blockers on 4.6. Based on this, should we
consider placing a target date for RC1 somewhere like end of August ?
What's missing and to do in 4.6 as far as I know:
1. Basic doc
Hi guys,
I am testing 4.6 briefly and basic operations work. I am also trying now VPN
functionality on a SNAT public IP, however I don't seem to get it working.
Can someone confirm it works for them so I know it's me (as always)? I am not
usually using this feature, but thought to try
Paul, this is not helpful. please supply changes for what you would like to
see instead so we can discuss.
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 10:10 AM, Paul Angus
wrote:
> Guys,
>
>
>
> I’m out and about this morning, but I’ve noticed that the release notes
> state that baseu
warning in the 4.6 installation guide(s) anywhere.
Which version (noredist or oss) have the packages on cloudstack.apt-get.eu been
built with?
And actually is there any difference between /rhel and /centos ?
Regards,
Paul Angus
VP Technology/Cloud Architect
ShapeBlue Ltd
S: +44 2
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Paul Angus
wrote:
> Which version (noredist or oss) have the packages on cloudstack.apt-get.eu
> been built with?
>
these used to be build noredist. Has anything changed? I think we must
replace them if it has.
--
Daan
“noredist”. Refer to Building from Source.'
> I can't find the same warning in the 4.6 installation guide(s) anywhere.
>
> Which version (noredist or oss) have the packages on cloudstack.apt-get.eu
> been built with?
>
> And actually is there any difference between /rhel
Talking about 4.6
There seems to be an issue when people upgrade from 4.5.2 and the awsapi
package is missing.
Can someone (ping @pdion) upgrade the release notes to mention the fact that
awsapi is removed and add a step in the upgrade process ?
> On Nov 20, 2015, at 2:39 PM, Wido
> On Nov 21, 2015, at 10:51 AM, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
>
> Talking about 4.6
>
> There seems to be an issue when people upgrade from 4.5.2 and the awsapi
> package is missing.
>
Ping on this.
Before me make the 4.6 release announcement is there an issue with the
ut
otherwise the upgrade went fine.
--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
Nux!
www.nux.ro
- Original Message -
> From: "Sebastien Goasguen"
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org, "Remi Bergsma" ,
> "Pierre-Luc Dion"
> Sent: Monday, 2
; <
> rberg...@schubergphilis.com>, "Pierre-Luc Dion"
> > Sent: Monday, 23 November, 2015 09:53:10
> > Subject: Re: 4.6 release
>
> >> On Nov 21, 2015, at 10:51 AM, Sebastien Goasguen
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Talking about 4.6
> >>
pi" to avoid conflicts,
>> but otherwise the upgrade went fine.
>>
>> --
>> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
>>
>> Nux!
>> www.nux.ro
>>
>> - Original Message -
>> > From: "Sebastien Goasguen"
>&g
aging.
>>>
>>> I had to manually "rpm -e --nodeps cloudstack-awsapi" to avoid conflicts,
>>> but otherwise the upgrade went fine.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
>>>
>>> Nux
te" it from the RPM packaging.
>>>>
>>>> I had to manually "rpm -e --nodeps cloudstack-awsapi" to avoid conflicts,
>>>> but otherwise the upgrade went fine.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Sent from the Delta quadrant usin
Hi,
For cloudstack-awsapi, shouldn't we include is rpm in the 4.6 repo so
```yum upgrade``` will work, then part of the RN would be to remove awsapi
after the upgrade if it's not used? Otherwise we can add ```rpm -e
--nodeps cloudstack-awsapi``` to the RN
For the repo URL http://clou
@erik and @nux
Can you check this:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-docs-rn/pull/26
let me know if you agree with the upgrade instructions..
> On Nov 23, 2015, at 1:48 PM, Pierre-Luc Dion wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> For cloudstack-awsapi, shouldn't we include is rpm in the
grade instructions..
>
> > On Nov 23, 2015, at 1:48 PM, Pierre-Luc Dion
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > For cloudstack-awsapi, shouldn't we include is rpm in the 4.6 repo so
> > ```yum upgrade``` will work, then part of the RN would be to remove
> awsapi
>
situation)
2. I dont think fast simulator is ready. Check the last message on the
thread you sent.
It would be better to get github jenkins gate ready(we dont have date or
expected time of this yet). If any help is needed in this effort, we should
work on this first than 4.6
It would help to
Today during the CloudStackdays we did a round table about Release
management targeting the next 4.6 releases.
Quick bullet point discussions:
ideas to change release planning
- Plugin contribution is complicated because often a new plugin involve
change on the core:
- ex
Hi All,
This is the email about why can we merge the cloudrouter.org in cloudstack
in the new 4.6.
I basic idea is in Advance Networking when we choose VLAN isolatation why
do we need more router.
Can we do something like same what Nuage Network Provides.
In Advance Networking configuration
Hi,
Is the current 4.6 system template working for anyone?
I get an error when VmwareStorageManagerImpl tries to un-tar it.
When I run the following manually, I get an error message saying that the
OVA doesn't look like a tar archive:
tar --no-same-owner -xf
Thoughts?
Thanks,
--
Hi all,
A lot of work is being done to make 4.6 ready for a release. It's great to see
it's getting better every day!
Today Rajani and myself looked at all blocker and critical issues on 4.6. We
decided to bump some of them to blocker. Two more issues need to verified
against curr
Can you guys help me with a few new features in 4.6 or even the last year ?
I lost track but want to mention some of them in tomorrow’s talk
thanks
-sebastien
Milamber reminded me that before releasing 4.6 we should include the latest
translated strings for the UI.
If you care about translation, you might be interested to work on it in the
coming days.
Here is where we stand:
Portuguese (Brazil) 100%
French (France) 100
On 29-10-15 09:28, Remi Bergsma wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We’re down to a single blocker:
>
> 1) CentOS 7 - systemd-tmpfiles - Operation not permitted
> This is about the CentOS 7 packaging of the Management Server.
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-881
Hi,
Not my pull request, but is this something that can be reviewed for 4.6 or
is it too late?
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-8682 (Replace openswan
ipsec with strongswan ipsec)
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/872
-Jan-Arve
2015-10-29 9:28 GMT+01:00 Remi Bergsma
Sebastien, I don't think commits in a big feature should be squashed. It
hinders review if to big chunks are submitted at once.
Op vr 15 mei 2015 om 11:27 schreef Sebastien Goasguen :
> Folks,
>
> As we prepare to try a new process for 4.6 release it would be nice to
> start pa
:55 AM, "Daan Hoogland" wrote:
> Sebastien, I don't think commits in a big feature should be squashed. It
> hinders review if to big chunks are submitted at once.
>
> Op vr 15 mei 2015 om 11:27 schreef Sebastien Goasguen :
>
> > Folks,
> >
> > As
On May 15, 2015 8:55 AM, "Daan Hoogland" wrote:
>
> > Sebastien, I don't think commits in a big feature should be squashed. It
> > hinders review if to big chunks are submitted at once.
> >
> > Op vr 15 mei 2015 om 11:27 schreef Sebastien Goasguen >
ack into master.
> > On May 15, 2015 8:55 AM, "Daan Hoogland"
> wrote:
> >
> > > Sebastien, I don't think commits in a big feature should be squashed.
> It
> > > hinders review if to big chunks are submitted at once.
> >
be squashed.
> It
> > > hinders review if to big chunks are submitted at once.
> > >
> > > Op vr 15 mei 2015 om 11:27 schreef Sebastien Goasguen <
> run...@gmail.com
> > >:
> > >
> > > > Folks,
> > > >
> > > >
, though.
>>>
>>> I suppose a way to get both would be to branch master, do a pull request
>>> from your dev branch to that branch, at which point it is reviewed, then
>>> squash merge that back into master.
>>> On May 15, 2015 8:55 AM, "Daan H
-Original Message-
From: Rajani Karuturi [mailto:raj...@apache.org]
Sent: 16 May 2015 03:38
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: Preparing for 4.6
-1 for squashed commits. I agree to what Daan said. Feature branch merge is
more convenient than squashed single commit.
If it was a smal
hink you get the best of
> both worlds that way.
>
> --
> Stephen Turner
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Rajani Karuturi [mailto:raj...@apache.org]
> Sent: 16 May 2015 03:38
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Preparing for 4.6
>
> -1 for
Hi
On 15.05.2015 11:27, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
> Folks,
>
> As we prepare to try a new process for 4.6 release it would be nice to start
> paying attention to master.
>
> - Good commit messages
The question is, what makes a commit message good? Maybe this helps:
htt
On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Rene Moser wrote:
> Hi
>
> On 15.05.2015 11:27, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
> > Folks,
> >
> > As we prepare to try a new process for 4.6 release it would be nice to
> start paying attention to master.
> >
> > - Good commi
at appears wrong was done,
only to find an inadequate description at the end of the trail.
--
Stephen Turner
-Original Message-
From: Erik Weber [mailto:terbol...@gmail.com]
Sent: 18 May 2015 09:32
To: dev
Subject: Re: Preparing for 4.6
On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Rene Moser wr
gt;>
> >>> I suppose a way to get both would be to branch master, do a pull
> request
> >>> from your dev branch to that branch, at which point it is reviewed,
> then
> >>> squash merge that back into master.
> >>> On May 15, 2015 8:55 AM, "Daan Hoogland&quo
ning. Should we also create Jira issues for that
and mark them as Improvement?
Taking into account the [VPC] Virtual Router, Citrix Resource Base and Libvirt
Computing Resource refactoring, we had only internal issues on Jira. However,
the changes have been documented on the 4.5/4.6 section
Hi Stephan
On 18.05.2015 10:39, Stephen Turner wrote:
> In my XenCenter dev team at Citrix, we have the policy of requiring a ticket
> number on every commit. If we find a bug and there isn't already a ticket, we
> create a ticket before committing the fix. I guess I've just dug through
> histo
aring for 4.6
Hi there,
I agree with the Jira ticket for the "new features, important fixes, security
fixes"
But I don’t think only about "new features, important fixes, security fixes”. I
put most of my time in make the code better and tested, for what we call
refactoring/r
> On 18-May-2015, at 2:02 pm, Erik Weber wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Rene Moser wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> On 15.05.2015 11:27, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
>>> Folks,
>>>
>>> As we prepare to try a new process for 4.6 releas
Okay,
+1 for create the ACS Jira issue for improvements as well.
Since Xen and Libvirt redesign will be on 4.6 - and are already documented - I
will just create 2 issues so we have a way of keeping track of them.
Cheers,
Wilder
On 18 May 2015, at 11:16, Stephen Turner
mailto:stephen.tur
can also
contain screenshots of the error, discussion with other developers, etc.
--
Stephen Turner
-Original Message-
From: Rene Moser [mailto:m...@renemoser.net]
Sent: 18 May 2015 10:13
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: Preparing for 4.6
Hi Stephan
On 18.05.2015 10:39
18, 2015, at 11:27 AM, Wilder Rodrigues
> wrote:
>
> Okay,
>
> +1 for create the ACS Jira issue for improvements as well.
>
> Since Xen and Libvirt redesign will be on 4.6 - and are already documented -
> I will just create 2 issues so we have a way of keeping track of
On a related note, commits should reference the JIRA ticket as well.
--
Erik
On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Wilder Rodrigues <
wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com> wrote:
> Okay,
>
> +1 for create the ACS Jira issue for improvements as well.
>
> Since Xen and Libvirt re
> +1 for create the ACS Jira issue for improvements as well.
> >
> > Since Xen and Libvirt redesign will be on 4.6 - and are already
> documented
> > - I will just create 2 issues so we have a way of keeping track of them.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Wilder
> >
>
>
>> On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Wilder Rodrigues <
>> wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Okay,
>>>
>>> +1 for create the ACS Jira issue for improvements as well.
>>>
>>> Since Xen and Libvirt redesign will be on
ilder Rodrigues <
> >> wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Okay,
> >>>
> >>> +1 for create the ACS Jira issue for improvements as well.
> >>>
> >>> Since Xen and Libvirt redesign will be on 4.6 - and are already
>
A ticket as well.
> >
> > --
> > Erik
> >
> > On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Wilder Rodrigues <
> > wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Okay,
> > >
> > > +1 for create the ACS Jira issue for improvements as wel
, at 11:27 AM, Wilder Rodrigues
>> wrote:
>>
>> Okay,
>>
>> +1 for create the ACS Jira issue for improvements as well.
>>
>> Since Xen and Libvirt redesign will be on 4.6 - and are already documented -
>> I will just create 2 issues so we have a way of
Erik
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Wilder Rodrigues <
> > > wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Okay,
> > > >
> > > > +1 for create the ACS Jira issue for improvements as well.
>
k changelog. The habit would be for everyone
> to remember to update the change log when they do a commit (and agree on a
> format for it)...
> >
> >
> >
> >> On May 18, 2015, at 11:27 AM, Wilder Rodrigues <
> wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com> wrote:
> >>
&
remember to update the change log when they do a commit (and agree on a
>> format for it)...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On May 18, 2015, at 11:27 AM, Wilder Rodrigues <
>> wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
t; >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I am also in favor of text changelog in the root.
> >>>
> >>> Creating JIRA for everything may lead to bad tickets anyway.
> >>>
> >>> What is also nice is a quick changelog. The habit would be for eve
I keep getting this when trying to build the latest master, anyone know of
a fix?
---
T E S T S
---
Running org.apache.cloudstack.utils.linux.MemStatTest
Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, S
On 28-07-15 04:51, Pierre-Luc Dion wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've create this jira filter[1] for the Release Manager, based on it, there
> would be only 4 maybe just 3 blockers on 4.6. Based on this, should we
> consider placing a target date for RC1 somewhere like end of August ?
I'm actually having trouble creating a VM whose root disk runs on zone-wide
primary storage.
This is definitely a blocker for 4.6. I'm just beginning to look into this,
but this is the error message I receive:
findZoneWideStoragePoolsByTags:Exception:No value specified for parameter
zone-wide primary storage.
>
> This is definitely a blocker for 4.6. I'm just beginning to look into
> this, but this is the error message I receive:
>
> findZoneWideStoragePoolsByTags:Exception:No value specified for parameter 4
>
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 8:51 PM, Pierre-Lu
t; mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm actually having trouble creating a VM whose root disk runs on
>> zone-wide primary storage.
>>
>> This is definitely a blocker for 4.6. I'm just beginning to look into
>> this, but this is the error message I
en trying to attach a data disk
>> that is based on zone-wide primary storage.
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Mike Tutkowski
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm actually having trouble creating a VM whose root d
ame error message when trying to attach a data disk
>>> that is based on zone-wide primary storage.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Mike Tutkowski
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I'm actually having trouble creating a VM whose root disk
30, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Mike Tutkowski
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> FYI that I get the same error message when trying to attach a data disk
> >>> that is based on zone-wide primary storage.
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 12:10 PM,
wish to
>> >> re-evaluate the FindBugs request and resubmit a fix.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Mike Tutkowski
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> FYI that I get the same error message when trying to atta
**
>>> >>
>>> >> I think I'm just going to revert this commit. It was related to a
>>> >> change put
>>> >> in at the request of FindBugs.
>>> >>
>>> >> I've CCed the relevant participants
;> >> (storage_pool_details.value=** NOT SPECIFIED **))) GROUP BY
> >>> >> storage_pool_details.pool_id HAVING COUNT(storage_pool_details.name)
> >=
> >>> >> **
> >>> >> NOT SPECIFIED **
> >>> >>
> >>>
1 - 100 of 621 matches
Mail list logo
