@somesh you message is not helping at all. The problems is being worked on by a lot of people. Folks know the current blockers and I am expecting to see PR come in to fix them in the coming days. We will then see what the results of BVT are.
Please read the full thread before replying. > On Sep 30, 2015, at 5:37 PM, Somesh Naidu <somesh.na...@citrix.com> wrote: > >> To sum it up: it’s easy to sit-down and wait for other people to work on >> features/test/fixes. > > Wilder - essentially are you saying these failures are due to a. Ramnath and > folks didn't contribute at the time and b. you did but weren't able to > completely nail it down? > > Raja/Ramnath - would it help and be better for the community as well as you > if you'd just let ACS build be in the current state (as per you unstable > router), create your own branch, implement your approach and fix the router > (stable as per your opinion) for your users. > > This way everyone would be happy. > > Regards, > Somesh > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Wilder Rodrigues [mailto:wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com] > Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 8:48 AM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: VR refactoring, concerns and a way out ? > > Raja, > > A nice way out would be to have more people knowing about coding and git. I > have no idea from where you got this non-sense approach, but I would say it > can be compared with the previous git flow the community had: not tests; no > PRs; no review. > > @Ramanath: you, and many others, should have pitched in when the code was > merged, months ago, and when effort to help testing was requested. > > To sum it up: it’s easy to sit-down and wait for other people to work on > features/test/fixes. > > Cheers, > Wilder > > >> On 24 Sep 2015, at 14:33, Sebastien Goasguen <run...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>> On Sep 24, 2015, at 2:00 PM, Ramanath Katru <ramanath.ka...@citrix.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> My vote is for the approach no.1 - to backout completely. Most of VR >>> functionalities are broken and are in a mess to say the least. It >>> definitely will take some time and effort from several folks to get it to a >>> stable state. >>> >> >> So which VR changes are we talking about. If it was merged it should mean >> that tests passed and it worked at least in a controlled environment. >> >>> Ram Katru >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Raja Pullela [mailto:raja.pull...@citrix.com] >>> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 2:06 PM >>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org >>> Subject: VR refactoring, concerns and a way out ? >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> >>> >>> I understand a concern on the VR changes was raised earlier. My apologies >>> to restart this thread again. >>> >>> >>> >>> However, my last conversation with Jayapal, who has fixed/have been fixing >>> lot of VR issues, about the VR issues and he is pretty concerned about the >>> refactoring that has happened. I have had the same concern for sometime >>> now (VR issues have been on the list of issues to be looked into for at >>> least 4+ weeks) and wanted to see a good solution for this- with VR being >>> very fundamental to the system. >>> >>> >>> >>> Couple of solutions/proposals – >>> >>> 1) Back out the VR changes – Pros: VR has been stable for some time >>> and it is working well. >>> >>> 2) Continue to fix/stability VR changes - Concerns: is the unknowns, >>> what we will find out and how long this will take to stabilize the VR >>> functionality. >>> >>> >>> >>> Please chime in if you have any thoughts or concerns around this, >>> >>> >>> >>> best, >>> >>> Raja >> >
