Re: [ovirt-devel] [VDSM] Build failure because missing ioprocess package in ovirt repos - solved

2016-08-18 Thread Sandro Bonazzola
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 4:16 PM, Nir Soffer wrote: > Merged, so I sent this to enable the ppc builds again: > https://gerrit.ovirt.org/62551 > > Someone with access to jenkins should verify that this jobs works now. > > will check tomorrow morning > > > On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 10:03 AM, Sandro

Re: [ovirt-devel] Python code style: introducing isort

2016-08-18 Thread Sandro Bonazzola
On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 12:36 PM, Eyal Edri wrote: > Adding infra also, as might be relevant for our code. > > On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Sandro Bonazzola > wrote: > >> Hi, >> in project maintained by integration team we tried to adhere to some >> styling rules while writing python code, on

Re: [ovirt-devel] [VDSM] Build failure because missing ioprocess package in ovirt repos - solved

2016-08-18 Thread Nir Soffer
Merged, so I sent this to enable the ppc builds again: https://gerrit.ovirt.org/62551 Someone with access to jenkins should verify that this jobs works now. On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 10:03 AM, Sandro Bonazzola wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 6:21 PM, Nir Soffer wrote: >> >> I posted this p

Re: [ovirt-devel] Bundled jar files in backend subpackage

2016-08-18 Thread Roman Mohr
Hi, On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Juan Hernández wrote: > On 08/18/2016 01:56 PM, Sandro Bonazzola wrote: > > Hi, > > looking at $ LC_ALL=C rpm -qlvp > > http://resources.ovirt.org/pub/ovirt-master-snapshot/rpm/ > fc24/noarch/ovirt-engine-backend-4.1.0-0.0.master. > 20160817221906.git75736af.

Re: [ovirt-devel] Bundled jar files in backend subpackage

2016-08-18 Thread Martin Perina
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Juan Hernández wrote: > On 08/18/2016 01:56 PM, Sandro Bonazzola wrote: > > Hi, > > looking at $ LC_ALL=C rpm -qlvp > > http://resources.ovirt.org/pub/ovirt-master-snapshot/rpm/ > fc24/noarch/ovirt-engine-backend-4.1.0-0.0.master. > 20160817221906.git75736af.fc24.

Re: [ovirt-devel] Bundled jar files in backend subpackage

2016-08-18 Thread Juan Hernández
On 08/18/2016 01:56 PM, Sandro Bonazzola wrote: > Hi, > looking at $ LC_ALL=C rpm -qlvp > http://resources.ovirt.org/pub/ovirt-master-snapshot/rpm/fc24/noarch/ovirt-engine-backend-4.1.0-0.0.master.20160817221906.git75736af.fc24.noarch.rpm|grep > jar |grep -v ^l |grep common > > I see: > > -rw-r--

[ovirt-devel] Bundled jar files in backend subpackage

2016-08-18 Thread Sandro Bonazzola
Hi, looking at $ LC_ALL=C rpm -qlvp http://resources.ovirt.org/pub/ovirt-master-snapshot/rpm/fc24/noarch/ovirt-engine-backend-4.1.0-0.0.master.20160817221906.git75736af.fc24.noarch.rpm|grep jar |grep -v ^l |grep common I see: -rw-r--r--1 rootroot77761 Aug 18 00:19 /usr

[ovirt-devel] Engine 4.0.3 stable branch created

2016-08-18 Thread Tal Nisan
Hi everyone. A branch for 4.0.3 was created today (ovirt-engine-4.0.3), please push your 4.0.3 patches to that branch. The branch was created from the 4.0.2 branch so if you had 4.0.3 patches merged today to the 4.0.2 branch they made it in, namely: 4035211563b526d49f2388e81cc8933df50a7ab5 packag

Re: [ovirt-devel] Alternatives to automatically move bugs to MODIFIED

2016-08-18 Thread Eyal Edri
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 10:38 AM, Michal Skrivanek < michal.skriva...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On 18 Aug 2016, at 09:32, Sandro Bonazzola wrote: > > > > On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 9:19 AM, Michal Skrivanek < > michal.skriva...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> >> On 18 Aug 2016, at 09:09, Sandro Bonazzola wrot

Re: [ovirt-devel] Alternatives to automatically move bugs to MODIFIED

2016-08-18 Thread Eyal Edri
It will be very and and actually save the infra alot of coding and effort to stop using this hook, But I really think it will introduce another problem of bugs on POST. If we can find a logic that will be the silver bullet for all the use cases then lets do it, if not, we have to make sure ALL mai

Re: [ovirt-devel] Alternatives to automatically move bugs to MODIFIED

2016-08-18 Thread Eyal Edri
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Eyal Edri wrote: > It will be very and and actually save the infra alot of coding and effort > to stop using this hook, > s very/very easy > But I really think it will introduce another problem of bugs on POST. > > If we can find a logic that will be the silve

Re: [ovirt-devel] Alternatives to automatically move bugs to MODIFIED

2016-08-18 Thread Michal Skrivanek
> On 18 Aug 2016, at 09:32, Sandro Bonazzola wrote: > > > > On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 9:19 AM, Michal Skrivanek > mailto:michal.skriva...@redhat.com>> wrote: > >> On 18 Aug 2016, at 09:09, Sandro Bonazzola > > wrote: >> >> >> >> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 5:12 PM, N

Re: [ovirt-devel] Alternatives to automatically move bugs to MODIFIED

2016-08-18 Thread Sandro Bonazzola
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 9:19 AM, Michal Skrivanek < michal.skriva...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On 18 Aug 2016, at 09:09, Sandro Bonazzola wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Nir Soffer wrote: > >> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 2:47 PM, Eyal Edri wrote: >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at

Re: [ovirt-devel] Alternatives to automatically move bugs to MODIFIED

2016-08-18 Thread Michal Skrivanek
> On 18 Aug 2016, at 09:09, Sandro Bonazzola wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Nir Soffer > wrote: > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 2:47 PM, Eyal Edri > wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Nir Soffer >

Re: [ovirt-devel] Alternatives to automatically move bugs to MODIFIED

2016-08-18 Thread Sandro Bonazzola
On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Nir Soffer wrote: > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 2:47 PM, Eyal Edri wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Nir Soffer wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 1:45 PM, Eyal Edri wrote: > >> > I still thinks its a very valuable hook and we are aware of t

Re: [ovirt-devel] [VDSM] Build failure because missing ioprocess package in ovirt repos - solved

2016-08-18 Thread Sandro Bonazzola
On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 6:21 PM, Nir Soffer wrote: > I posted this patch, changing python-ioprocess to require > ioprocess-version (instead of version-release). This seem to resolve > the issue and is more correct, we don't really need ioprocess from the > same build. > > Please review > https://