Hi Will, I’d propose to test this one as it fixes a nasty concurrency issue. I runs on prod at SBP for some time now so I’m quite sure it’s solid but let’s run the tests again to be sure.
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1470 Regards, Remi On 08/04/16 20:56, "williamstev...@gmail.com on behalf of Will Stevens" <williamstev...@gmail.com on behalf of wstev...@cloudops.com> wrote: >Thanks for the items syed. I have added them to my active list. > >*Will STEVENS* >Lead Developer > >*CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts >420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 >w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ > >On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:32 PM, Syed Mushtaq <syed1.mush...@gmail.com> >wrote: > >> Hi Will, >> >> Thanks for all the effort you've put into getting the PRs moving. This is >> huge for the community. >> >> From my side, I have these two PRs which I think are critical as they fix >> broken functionality. >> >> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1423 : This fixes client side >> VPN >> failure due to IPSEC not starting on the VR >> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1331: When you restart the >> management server, all templates go back to "Ready" state when using Swift. >> This PR fixes that. >> >> >> >> -Syed >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 5:43 PM, Will Stevens <wstev...@cloudops.com> >> wrote: >> >> > If you are using bubble, here are a few more 'tweaks'. >> > >> > The 'bubble-blueprint' is missing the following, so you will need to do >> the >> > following after you run it: >> > >> > $ systemctl stop firewalld >> > $ systemctl disable firewalld >> > >> > Also, if you are using a static IP, you will have to manually add the >> > following to your /etc/resolv.conf file. >> > >> > search cloud.lan >> > nameserver 192.168.22.1 >> > >> > After you add it, you will have to do the following for everything to get >> > picked up. >> > >> > $ systemctl restart supervisord >> > >> > Just ask if you have problems with bubble, a few of use are using it and >> > have worked through most of the issues. :) >> > >> > *Will STEVENS* >> > Lead Developer >> > >> > *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts >> > 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 >> > w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ >> > >> > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 4:34 PM, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > For those interested: Fred and I have some adjustments for Fedora and >> as >> > > Cloudstack we need to remain at java 1.7 for now while the SBP guys are >> > > ahead of us at 1.8. >> > > >> > > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 10:30 PM, Remi Bergsma < >> > rberg...@schubergphilis.com >> > > > >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > > Great to see more and more people use the bubbles! >> > > > >> > > > Setting up: >> > > > https://github.com/MissionCriticalCloud/bubble-blueprint >> > > > >> > > > Using: >> > > > https://github.com/MissionCriticalCloud/bubble-toolkit >> > > > >> > > > Happy testing :-) >> > > > >> > > > Regards, Remi >> > > > >> > > > > On 07 Apr 2016, at 19:56, Will Stevens <wstev...@cloudops.com> >> > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > If you want me to verify things in your env, you can send me a >> tmate >> > > > > <https://tmate.io/> and I can have a look. >> > > > > >> > > > > *Will STEVENS* >> > > > > Lead Developer >> > > > > >> > > > > *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts >> > > > > 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 >> > > > > w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ >> > > > > >> > > > > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Daan Hoogland < >> > daan.hoogl...@gmail.com >> > > > >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > >> yes, makes perfect sense. I skipped 1326 for now, I just tried to >> > > build >> > > > >> 1436 it fails in the rpm build fase. I am now going to try that ui >> > > > thing to >> > > > >> build confidence in my test environment. >> > > > >> >> > > > >> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:49 PM, Rafael Weingärtner < >> > > > >> rafaelweingart...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > > >> >> > > > >>> Sure it makes. >> > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > >>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 2:47 PM, Will Stevens < >> > wstev...@cloudops.com> >> > > > >>> wrote: >> > > > >>> >> > > > >>>> Yes, if the PR is ONLY a test and does not touch any other code >> > then >> > > > we >> > > > >>> can >> > > > >>>> only run that test. I agree with you. >> > > > >>>> >> > > > >>>> If any code is changed outside the test, I always run the full >> > > suite. >> > > > >>> Make >> > > > >>>> sense? >> > > > >>>> >> > > > >>>> *Will STEVENS* >> > > > >>>> Lead Developer >> > > > >>>> >> > > > >>>> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts >> > > > >>>> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 >> > > > >>>> w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ >> > > > >>>> >> > > > >>>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 1:41 PM, Daan Hoogland < >> > > > daan.hoogl...@gmail.com >> > > > >>> >> > > > >>>> wrote: >> > > > >>>> >> > > > >>>>> running a new test in an environment should pass but should not >> > > > >> require >> > > > >>>> all >> > > > >>>>> other test being re-validated. SO what is the point of running >> > all >> > > > >>>> others? >> > > > >>>>> I am not saying we shouldn't regularly run all tests but in >> this >> > > case >> > > > >>> it >> > > > >>>>> adds no value AFAICT. >> > > > >>>>> >> > > > >>>>> >> > > > >>>>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:35 PM, Will Stevens < >> > > wstev...@cloudops.com> >> > > > >>>>> wrote: >> > > > >>>>> >> > > > >>>>>> Yes, I want to run tests against the tests. I have found >> issues >> > > in >> > > > >>>> some >> > > > >>>>> of >> > > > >>>>>> the tests not working as expected, so I add the test to the >> run >> > > and >> > > > >>> run >> > > > >>>>>> them. I think it is worth it because then we know the test is >> > > > >> valid >> > > > >>>>>> later. I would rather have the author fix the test now if >> there >> > > > >> are >> > > > >>>>>> problems than having to work through it later. >> > > > >>>>>> >> > > > >>>>>> I am going to be doing a big push on getting testing cleaned >> up, >> > > so >> > > > >>>> when >> > > > >>>>> I >> > > > >>>>>> start going through all the tests and validating them, I want >> to >> > > > >>> reduce >> > > > >>>>> the >> > > > >>>>>> amount of work I have to do, so validating the tests at source >> > > > >> makes >> > > > >>>>> sense. >> > > > >>>>>> :) >> > > > >>>>>> >> > > > >>>>>> *Will STEVENS* >> > > > >>>>>> Lead Developer >> > > > >>>>>> >> > > > >>>>>> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts >> > > > >>>>>> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 >> > > > >>>>>> w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ >> > > > >>>>>> >> > > > >>>>>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 1:30 PM, Daan Hoogland < >> > > > >>> daan.hoogl...@gmail.com >> > > > >>>>> >> > > > >>>>>> wrote: >> > > > >>>>>> >> > > > >>>>>>> 1326 is just a test. it does not touch production code. Do we >> > run >> > > > >>>>>>> regression tests against such PRs. seems a waste to me. >> > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > >>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:27 PM, Daan Hoogland < >> > > > >>>> daan.hoogl...@gmail.com >> > > > >>>>>> >> > > > >>>>>>> wrote: >> > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > >>>>>>>> >> > > > >>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:26 PM, Daan Hoogland < >> > > > >>>>> daan.hoogl...@gmail.com >> > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > >>>>>>>> wrote: >> > > > >>>>>>>> >> > > > >>>>>>>>> 1326 - master (*pending CI) >> > > > >>>>>>>> >> > > > >>>>>>>> >> > > > >>>>>>>> starting >> > > > >>>>>>>> >> > > > >>>>>>>> >> > > > >>>>>>>> >> > > > >>>>>>>> -- >> > > > >>>>>>>> Daan >> > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > >>>>>>> -- >> > > > >>>>>>> Daan >> > > > >>>>> >> > > > >>>>> >> > > > >>>>> >> > > > >>>>> -- >> > > > >>>>> Daan >> > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > >>> -- >> > > > >>> Rafael Weingärtner >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> -- >> > > > >> Daan >> > > > >> >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Daan >> > > >> > >>
