+1 tested aritifact http://jenkins.cloudstack.org/job/build-4.0-nonoss-rhel63/140/ with following setup:
Advanced Zone with two cluster, one cluster using vSphere 5.1 (yes it's 5.1), one ESXi 5.1 host, validated VM lifecycle management. one cluster using XenServer 5.6 sp2, VM lifecyle worked fine. Regards Mice 2012/10/24 Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@citrix.com>: > +1, tested using devcloud, building, packaging (for ubuntu) and deployment > worked. > Basic zone setup went fine, had given 3GB to devcloud and successfully ran a > one user vm: http://www.bhaisaab.org/vms/cent.vhd (minimal cent fork) > > Regards. > ________________________________________ > From: Edison Su [edison...@citrix.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 4:19 AM > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org; Chip Childers (ASF) > Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, third round > > It's a build issue, nothing related to our code. > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Chandan Purushothama [mailto:chandan.purushoth...@citrix.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 3:33 PM >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org; Chip Childers (ASF) >> Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, third >> round >> >> I failed with the Cloud Agent Installation on Ubuntu 12.04 >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-408 >> >> Thank you, >> Chandan. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 2:18 PM >> To: Chip Childers (ASF) >> Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, third >> round >> >> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 12:16 PM, Chip Childers (ASF) >> <chipchild...@apache.org> wrote: >> > Hi All, >> > >> > I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) >> Release >> > 4.0.0-incubating (third round). >> > >> > We encourage the whole community to download and test these release >> > artifacts, so that any critical issues can be resolved before the >> > release is made. The more time that each individual spends reviewing >> > the artifacts, the higher confidence we can have in both the release >> > itself and our ability to pass an IPMC vote later on. Everyone is >> > free to vote on this release, so please give it a shot. >> > >> > Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found >> here: >> > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+ >> > test+procedure >> > >> > If you have any trouble setting up a test environment using the >> > procedure above, please ask on the cloudstack-dev@i.a.o list. >> Someone >> > will be sure to help, and we'll improve our test procedure >> > documentation at the same time! >> > >> > Now, on to the specifics of what we are voting on... >> > >> > >> > The following artifacts are up for the vote: >> > >> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.0- >> > incubating/ >> > >> > PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58): >> > http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS >> > >> > Branch: 4.0 >> > Commit: 6355965dcd956811dd471a9d03c73dadcf68f480 >> > >> > >> > List of changes: >> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator- >> cloudstack.git;a=b >> > lob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0 >> > >> > The artifacts being voted on during this round also include the >> > following additional fixes (most were identified as part of testing >> > during the last round of voting): >> > >> > * Many documentation fixes (particularly the release notes and >> > installation guide) >> > * CLOUDSTACK-341: Failing to display Management Traffic Details on >> the >> > UI >> > * CLOUDSTACK-349: Russian l10n not properly displaying >> > * Correction to the devcloud rdeploy build target, to make testing >> > easier >> > * CLOUDSTACK-363: Upgrades from 2.2.14, 3.0.2 to the Current build >> > will fail >> > * CLOUDSTACK-118: Status of host resorce stuck in >> "ErrorInMaintenance" >> > * DISCLAIMER added to the Marvin tool dir >> > >> > >> > The vote will be open for 72 hours. >> > >> > >> > For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be >> > sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote? >> > [ ] +1 approve >> > [ ] +0 no opinion >> > [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why) >> > >> > Thanks! >> >> Hi all, >> >> 1 day down, and we have 2 +1 votes so far. Please take an opportunity >> to test and cast your vote! >> >> -chip
