hey @jdaggett I see it has been a while since you touched this PR.
I am interested in this code, any idea when will it merge.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs-openstack/pull/159#issuecomment-65060082
Hi @sallum thank you very much for the effort. I am really looking forward to
see this code in the jclouds repo hopefully it will help get glance out of the
lab.
do you still need this code in jclouds version 1.7 ?
I am guessing there will be many merge issues with master
will you create a
+
+ public Builder? toBuilder() {
+ return new ConcreteBuilder().fromImage(this);
+ }
+
+ public abstract static class BuilderT extends BuilderT extends
Resource.BuilderT {
+ protected Long size;
+ protected String checksum;
+ protected Date updatedAt;
+
ping @jdaggett , @everett-toews ?
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs-openstack/pull/166#issuecomment-63495674
@sallum @jdaggett @everett-toews @nacx is there a reason this is closed? seems
like we are still missing openstack glance v2...
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs-openstack/pull/77#issuecomment-63496138
ping @jdaggett , @everett-toews
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/573#issuecomment-63495357
Cool if @sallum won't be able to get to it I can take a stab at getting this
merged to master
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs-openstack/pull/77#issuecomment-63503495
I think the second option is the better one for all parties so I'll start from
it. Worst case I'll move to option one...
agreed?
As you said @Everett we'll give it a few days before I start...
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
The change works as is. I believe I do. I would rather this to be merged as is
because this or is open for a long time now and I have no use for the second
field. I have no problem adding the other field in a second PR if we agree it
is better with the second field as well
---
Reply to
Thank you. Yeah it need to go to master. Would u like me to create a new PR for
it?
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/562#issuecomment-62475042
@demobox ping?
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/562#issuecomment-62311419
Sure does. Thanks Andrew :)
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/562#issuecomment-61955782
ping
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/562#issuecomment-61937124
i keep running and it doesnt work locally, so i dont know what r the issues, if
you can send me the issues i'll fix them...
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/562#issuecomment-60754945
:/ not sure why cloudbees fails ran locally ran fine
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/562#issuecomment-60509558
Yeah. Seems legit :)
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/581#issuecomment-60357081
cinder availability zones api + list call implemented
from PR https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/560
You can merge this Pull Request by running:
git pull https://github.com/inbarsto/cloudband-jclouds cinderAZMaster
Or you can view, comment on it, or merge it online at:
see PR https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/580
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/560#issuecomment-60196386
Closed #580.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/580#event-182569095
cinder availability zones api + list call implemented
fro PR https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/560
You can merge this Pull Request by running:
git pull https://github.com/inbarsto/cloudband-jclouds cinderAZMaster2
Or you can view, comment on it, or merge it online at:
why is this closed?
its not merged to 1.8 which was the intent :(
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/560#issuecomment-60268110
yeah i got that a bit late, sorry for the mess Jeremy (pls don't give up on me
yet)
I already started to create new PR to master and not to a versioned branch this
was i think one of the first PR's,
the intent is to merge to master as well as 1.8 if possible...
sorry for driving u nuts
---
i saw, fixed
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/581#issuecomment-60272655
done
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/581#issuecomment-60273396
thanks @demobox :)
and @jdaggett and @adriancole and god knows who else was on the original PR :)
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/581#issuecomment-60347554
is this good to go? (at least on master until 1.8 is finished?)
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/560#issuecomment-60043919
is this good to go? (at least on master until 1.8 is finished?)
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/562#issuecomment-60043895
will do
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/560#issuecomment-60193235
:+1: yay :)
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs-openstack/pull/163#issuecomment-59962019
+ protected ConcreteBuilder self() {
+ return this;
+ }
+ }
+
+ protected String binary;
+ protected String host;
+ protected State state;
+ protected Status status;
+ protected String disabledReason;
+ @Named(updated_at)
+ private final OptionalDate
+return valueOf(checkNotNull(state, state).toUpperCase());
+ } catch (IllegalArgumentException e) {
+return UNRECOGNIZED;
+ }
+ }
+ }
+
+ public static Builder? builder() {
+ return new ConcreteBuilder();
+ }
+
+ public Builder?
+import javax.ws.rs.PUT;
+import javax.ws.rs.Path;
+import javax.ws.rs.Produces;
+import javax.ws.rs.core.MediaType;
+
+/**
+ * Provides access to OpenStack Compute (Nova) Services extension API.
+ */
+@Beta
+@Extension(of = ServiceType.COMPUTE, namespace =
removed abstract builders for volume and snapshot + added snapshot extended
attributes
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/562#issuecomment-59640731
@@ -231,11 +237,11 @@ public static Volume forId(String volumeId) {
@Named(display_description)
private final String description;
private final MapString, String metadata;
nope the field name is metadata...
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
@@ -142,11 +151,10 @@ protected ConcreteBuilder self() {
private final String name;
@Named(display_description)
private final String description;
+ private final OptionalSnapshotExtendedAttributes extendedAttributes;
nope, see:
+ * distributed under the License is distributed on an AS IS BASIS,
+ * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
+ * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
+ * limitations under the License.
+ */
+
+package
yeah definitely to master and 1.8.x.
the use case is for us to run on a multi tenancy openstack we need to know what
resource belongs to which object.
(there is a flag that you can use that brings in a list all the resources of a
certain type for all the tenants)
---
Reply to this email
@@ -117,6 +118,7 @@ public void testListVolumesInDetail() {
assertEquals(details.getName(), vol.getName());
assertEquals(details.getDescription(), vol.getDescription());
assertEquals(details.getCreated(), vol.getCreated());
+
:+1:
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs-openstack/pull/163#issuecomment-59617529
so... good to go?
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/562#issuecomment-59001756
@ConstructorProperties({
- id, volume_id, status, size, created_at, display_name,
display_description
+ id, volume_id, status, size, created_at, display_name,
display_description, os-extended-snapshot-attributes:project_id
hmm, I just found some thing in the code i think
fixing the snapshot extension and the builders... will push soon
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/562#issuecomment-59054866
Openstack nova list IP pools
extension api
You can merge this Pull Request by running:
git pull https://github.com/inbarsto/cloudband-jclouds ListIPPools
Or you can view, comment on it, or merge it online at:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/570
-- Commit Summary --
* Openstack
Fixes / response in 2 hours
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/570#issuecomment-58805773
+
+ private static class ConcreteBuilder extends BuilderConcreteBuilder {
+ @Override
+ protected ConcreteBuilder self() {
+ return this;
+ }
+ }
+
+ private final Boolean available;
+
+ @ConstructorProperties({available})
+ protected ZoneState(Boolean
it was hmm... an experience :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/560#issuecomment-58809845
fixed live test and expect test name
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/570#issuecomment-58810629
fixed the test/s :grin:
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs-openstack/pull/162#issuecomment-58812856
grin. Hopefully, an experience that changes things for the better - not just
for you, but for all contributors. So we all have something to be grateful to
you for ;-)
you guys are awesome jclouds community is gr8 :)
it is for 1.8 i'll be happy if it will land there and in master as well
if
cloudbees having problems, i don't believe they are this PR related...
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs-openstack/pull/162#issuecomment-58813374
Thanks :) :+1:
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/570#issuecomment-58817814
Good to go?
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs-openstack/pull/162#issuecomment-58818196
@@ -47,6 +49,14 @@ public CreateImageOptions id(String id) {
return this;
}
+ /**
+* @param url the url of the image to be copied into openstack
+*/
+ public UpdateImageOptions copyFrom(String url) {
wont work if you meant to use it as:
headers.put(String, String)
public static final String HEADER_PREFIX = X-Image-Meta-;
+ public static final String GLANCE_HEADER_PREFIX = x-glance-api-;
yeah see line 802 :)
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs-openstack/pull/152/files#r18654633
@@ -131,5 +141,12 @@ public static CreateImageOptions owner(String owner) {
public static CreateImageOptions property(String key, String value) {
return CreateImageOptions.class.cast(new
CreateImageOptions().property(key, value));
}
+
+ /**
+ * @see
did some mess in git, creating new PR with fixes
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs-openstack/pull/152#issuecomment-58534043
this is the fixed PR #152
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs-openstack/pull/162#issuecomment-58534976
having problems regarding checkstyle
@jdaggett any advice?
[istolber@dev-istolber:openstack-glance]$ mvn checkstyle:checkstyle
[INFO] Scanning for projects...
[INFO]
[INFO]
@ConstructorProperties({
- id, volume_id, status, size, created_at, display_name,
display_description
+ id, volume_id, status, size, created_at, display_name,
display_description, os-extended-snapshot-attributes:project_id
wont do it nullable be simpler and will present a
@@ -219,6 +219,22 @@ protected Volume testVolume() {
.build();
}
+ protected Volume testVolumeDetailed() {
+ return Volume.builder()
+.id(60761c60-0f56-4499-b522-ff13e120af10)
+.size(1)
+.name(test)
+.zone(nova)
+
@@ -79,4 +80,10 @@ SnapshotApi getSnapshotApiForZone(
QuotaApi getQuotaApi(
@EndpointParam(parser = ZoneToEndpoint.class) @Nullable String
zone);
+ /**
+* provides synchronous access to availability zone features
+*/
+ @Delegate
+ AvailabilityZoneApi
I am actually using this for the good part of a year now to upload images to
openstack though third party image server or internal image server (instead of
sending the payload through jclouds...)
regarding the test since we dont have a known public http server and openstacks
that are open to it
@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
+{
+availabilityZoneInfo: [{
+zoneState: {
+available: true
+},
+zoneName: nova
+}]
+}
done
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/560/files#r18660648
ok, i think i am done :)
pls let me know if there is anything else,
regarding abstract builder (painful subject)
I fixed it here but there is the rest of all domain for nova and cinder (at
least maybe more) to fix...
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
looks like there are unrelated tests that fail...
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/560#issuecomment-58547210
added expect and live tests :)
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs-openstack/pull/162#issuecomment-58567561
Seems like the is an unrelated test in neutron lbaas that fails ...
Good to go?
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs-openstack/pull/162#issuecomment-58569431
added tenant id to volume and project id to snapshot
You can merge this Pull Request by running:
git pull https://github.com/inbarsto/cloudband-jclouds
volumeSnapshotTenantProject
Or you can view, comment on it, or merge it online at:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/562
-- Commit
looks like cloudBees finished successfully but after that got an exception.
I dont think it is code related...
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/560#issuecomment-58316271
issue in cloudbees doesn't seem code related to the PR
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/561#issuecomment-58318929
i think i fixed it all accept for the concrete builder i can use an example...
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/560#issuecomment-58328772
ok i think i am all done let me know if there is anything else..
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/560#issuecomment-58332886
it was by mistake returned it..
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/561#issuecomment-58337656
Unfotunatly I wont be neae a computer in the comming 24 hours (jewish hollidays
are crap...)
If this cant go as is then I will create a new PR after the holliday for the
master branch.
Regardless if you can provide an example of how should the change look wirhout
the abstract builder i dont
Unfotunatly I wont be neae a computer in the comming 24 hours (jewish hollidays
are crap...)
If this cant go as is then I will create a new PR after the holliday for the
master branch.
Regardless if you can provide an example of how should the change look wirhout
the abstract builder i dont
+ public abstract static class BuilderT extends BuilderT {
+ protected abstract T self();
+
+ protected ZoneState state;
+ protected String name;
+
+ /**
+ * @see AvailabilityZone#getName()
+ */
+ public T name(String name) {
+ this.name =
+ @Override
+ protected ConcreteBuilder self() {
+ return this;
+ }
+ }
+
+ private final String name;
+ private final ZoneState state;
+
+ @ConstructorProperties({
+ zoneName, zoneState
+ })
+ protected AvailabilityZone(String name,
Most comments seems valid but note that most of the code is the same as in nova
availability zone.
That said lets decide if these comments are valid for nova az as well i'll be
happy to do that as well as long as they have the same convention.
It will look strange if method names will be
+ * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
+ * limitations under the License.
+ */
+
+package org.jclouds.openstack.cinder.v1.extensions;
+
+/**
+ * Extension namespaces
+ */
+public final class ExtensionNamespaces {
+
+ /**
+* Admin Action extension
+ * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
+ * limitations under the License.
+ */
+
+package org.jclouds.openstack.cinder.v1.extensions;
+
+/**
+ * Extension namespaces
+ */
+public final class ExtensionNamespaces {
+
+ /**
+* Admin Action extension
opestack support vm console
You can merge this Pull Request by running:
git pull https://github.com/inbarsto/cloudband-jclouds serverVmConsoleContrib
Or you can view, comment on it, or merge it online at:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/557
-- Commit Summary --
* opestack
fix no authentication required (token) for keystone RoleAdminApi
fixed mandatory AZ for host aggregate on nova
You can merge this Pull Request by running:
git pull https://github.com/inbarsto/cloudband-jclouds keystoneNovaAgg
Or you can view, comment on it, or merge it online at:
you are correct sir :) (exactly what happened to me...)
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/559#issuecomment-58307152
tested on live env btw (Havanah and IceHouse)
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/559#issuecomment-58308234
so... are we good to go?
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/559#issuecomment-58309883
cheers :+1: more on the way :)
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/559#issuecomment-58311312
availability zones api for openstack cinder and list availability zones for
cinder
You can merge this Pull Request by running:
git pull https://github.com/inbarsto/cloudband-jclouds cinderAZ
Or you can view, comment on it, or merge it online at:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/560
added zone to openstack nova Host
You can merge this Pull Request by running:
git pull https://github.com/inbarsto/cloudband-jclouds addedZoneToHost
Or you can view, comment on it, or merge it online at:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/561
-- Commit Summary --
* added zone to
look like the is an unrelated problem :/
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs-openstack/pull/152#issuecomment-58031367
openstack glance added option copy from to create image so that the payload
doesn#39;t go through jclouds client
You can merge this Pull Request by running:
git pull https://github.com/inbarsto/cloudband-jclouds-labs-openstack
glanceCopyFrom
Or you can view, comment on it, or merge it online
90 matches
Mail list logo
