Re: [VOTE] [RESULTS] Apache CloudStack 4.3.0 (ninth round)

2014-03-22 Thread Wilder Rodrigues 
Great news!

Have a nice weekend, guys and gals!

Cheers,
Wilder

Sent from my iPhone

> On 21 Mar 2014, at 20:08, "Animesh Chaturvedi" 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> The vote has *passed* with the following results (binding PMC votes indicated 
> with a "*" next to their name:
> 
> +1 : Animesh*, Edison*, Ilya*, Amogh, Wilder
> +0 : Daan *
> -1 : Tanner (The issue CLOUDSTACK-6266 could not be reproduced )
> 
> I'm going to proceed with moving the release into the distribution repo now 
> and other release tasks.
> 
> Thanks
> Animesh
> 
> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Animesh Chaturvedi [mailto:animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 12:06 PM
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Subject: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.3.0 (ninth round)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Hi All,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I've created a 4.3.0 release, with the following artifacts up for a
>> 
>> vote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Git Branch and Commit SH:
>> 
>> https://git-wip-
>> us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.3
>> Commit:  0810029f274878eca8fd74b44ab1117054e929a5
>> 
>> 
>> List of changes:
>> 
>> New Features in 4.3: https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12325248
>> 
>> Improvement in 4.3: https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12325249
>> 
>> Issues fixed in 4.3 https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12326161
>> 
>> Known Issues in 4.3: https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12326162
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Source release (checksums and signatures are available at the same
>> 
>> location):
>> 
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/cloudstack/4.3.0/
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> PGP release keys (signed using 94BE0D7C):
>> 
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/cloudstack/KEYS
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Testing instructions are here:
>> 
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Release+test+pro
>> cedure
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Vote will be open for 72 hours (Friday 3/21 12:05 PM PST)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to indicate
>> "(binding)" with their vote?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> [ ] +1  approve
>> 
>> [ ] +0  no opinion
>> 
>> [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks
>> 
>> Animesh
>

RE: GRE isolation - no in service upgrade (4.1.1 to 4.3.0) - Is your zone an Advanced zone or Basic zone? (2)

2014-03-22 Thread Florin Dumitrascu 
At what stage is the DB upgrade performed ? Is it handled by the new version of 
CS on first time start, or does the admin have to run something manually ?
I have followed the upgrade instructions here and there was nothing mentioned 
about a database upgrade step (please note I am using XenServer):
http://apache-cloudstack-release-notes.readthedocs.org/en/latest/rnotes.html#upgrade-from-4-1-x-to-4-3

I did not invoke "cloudstack-setup-database" script as my understanding is that 
should be called on a clean install only.

Thank you,
Florin




From: Jessica Wang [jessica.w...@citrix.com]
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 11:19 PM
To: Alena Prokharchyk; Florin Dumitrascu; Murali Reddy
Cc: Nguyen Anh Tu (t...@apache.org); dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: RE: GRE isolation - no in service upgrade (4.1.1 to 4.3.0) - Is your 
zone an Advanced zone or Basic zone? (2)

+1


-Original Message-
From: Alena Prokharchyk
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 4:18 PM
To: Jessica Wang; Florin Dumitrascu; Murali Reddy
Cc: Nguyen Anh Tu (t...@apache.org); dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: GRE isolation - no in service upgrade (4.1.1 to 4.3.0) - Is your 
zone an Advanced zone or Basic zone? (2)

Then its a DB upgrade bug. If the GRE isolation is supported on the
network in 4.1.1, DB upgrade should have inserted the provider to physical
network.

On 3/21/14, 3:51 PM, "Jessica Wang"  wrote:

>> [Alena] Not exactly like that.
>> [Alena] None of the providers are added to the physical network by
>>default if execute createPhysicalNetwork call via API.
>> [Alena] Our CS UI does this job - adding the providers to the network -
>>for you by calling addNetworkServiceProvider call.
>
>Actually, OVS provider is an exception.
>UI doesn't do the job because server-side already does the job.
>When you create an Advanced zone in 4.3 code, server-side will
>automatically add OVS provider to its physical network.
>However, since your zone was created in 4.1 code and upgraded to 4.3,
>server-side won't automatically add OVS provider to its physical network.
>
>Murali, please confirm.
>
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Alena Prokharchyk
>Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 2:44 PM
>To: Florin Dumitrascu; Jessica Wang; Murali Reddy; Florin Dumitrascu
>Cc: Nguyen Anh Tu (t...@apache.org); dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>Subject: Re: GRE isolation - no in service upgrade (4.1.1 to 4.3.0) - Is
>your zone an Advanced zone or Basic zone? (2)
>
>
>
>On 3/21/14, 2:34 PM, "Florin Dumitrascu"
> wrote:
>
>>Hi,
>>
>>Alena, my assumption is that the Ovs provider is created when you create
>>the physical network with GRE isolation (if someone can confirm ...).
>>When I configured CS RC8 from scratch, I could see the provider and
>>enable it in the GUI.
>
>Not exactly like that. None of the providers are added to the physical
>network by default if execute createPhysicalNetwork call via API. Our CS
>UI does this job - adding the providers to the network - for you by
>calling addNetworkServiceProvider call.
>
>
>
>>But when I have upgraded from CS 4.1.1 to 4.3.0 RC9, I have preserved the
>>existing configuration with the existing physical network.
>>So my assumption is that the physical network was not updated with the
>>OVS provider (such a provider was not needed in CS 4.1.1).
>
>So while you were on 4.1.1, GRE isolation was disabled? Did you enable it
>on 4.3? If there is a way to enable new isolation on the physical network,
>on my opinion - the UI should perform the background call and add all the
>providers associated with this option, to the physical network. So it
>would be a UI issue.
>
>Or the case was the following - the GRE isolation was enabled on your
>network while on 4.1.1, but new provider - OVS - was added in 4.3. And
>this provider wasn't added to existing physical networks during the
>upgrade. Then its a database upgrade bug.
>
>
>Please confirm which one from the above is correct.
>
>>
>>Jessica, I am building CentOS RPM packages from the RC source, using
>>"package.sh" script in the source packaging folder. Not aware about the
>>difference between "oss" and "noredist".
>>Also, my setup is for an advanced zone.
>>
>>Kind Regards,
>>Florin
>>
>>
>>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: Jessica Wang [mailto:jessica.w...@citrix.com]
>>Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 8:28 PM
>>To: Florin Dumitrascu; Murali Reddy
>>Cc: Nguyen Anh Tu (t...@apache.org); dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Alena
>>Prokharchyk
>>Subject: RE: GRE isolation - no in service upgrade (4.1.1 to 4.3.0) - Is
>>your zone an Advanced zone or Basic zone? (2)
>>
>>Florin,
>>UI doesn't show OVS service provider because database doesn't have OVS
>>service provider.
>>The reasons might be:
>>(1) You are using oss build (should be using noredist build).
>>(2) Your zone is a Basic zone (OVS service provider is only supported in
>>Advanced zone)
>>
>>
>>Murali,
>>Is there other possibility?
>>
>>
>>Jessica
>>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: Jessica Wa

Build failed in Jenkins: cloudstack-4.4-maven-build #35

2014-03-22 Thread jenkins 
See 

--
Started by an SCM change
[EnvInject] - Loading node environment variables.
Building remotely on rpmbuilder-2 in workspace 

Fetching changes from the remote Git repository
Fetching upstream changes from 
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/cloudstack.git
FATAL: Failed to fetch from 
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/cloudstack.git
hudson.plugins.git.GitException: Failed to fetch from 
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/cloudstack.git
at hudson.plugins.git.GitSCM.fetchFrom(GitSCM.java:625)
at hudson.plugins.git.GitSCM.retrieveChanges(GitSCM.java:847)
at hudson.plugins.git.GitSCM.checkout(GitSCM.java:872)
at hudson.model.AbstractProject.checkout(AbstractProject.java:1411)
at 
hudson.model.AbstractBuild$AbstractBuildExecution.defaultCheckout(AbstractBuild.java:651)
at jenkins.scm.SCMCheckoutStrategy.checkout(SCMCheckoutStrategy.java:88)
at 
hudson.model.AbstractBuild$AbstractBuildExecution.run(AbstractBuild.java:560)
at hudson.model.Run.execute(Run.java:1670)
at hudson.model.FreeStyleBuild.run(FreeStyleBuild.java:46)
at hudson.model.ResourceController.execute(ResourceController.java:88)
at hudson.model.Executor.run(Executor.java:231)
Caused by: hudson.plugins.git.GitException: Failed to connect to 
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/cloudstack.git (status = 502)
at 
org.jenkinsci.plugins.gitclient.CliGitAPIImpl.checkCredentials(CliGitAPIImpl.java:1602)
at 
org.jenkinsci.plugins.gitclient.CliGitAPIImpl.launchCommandWithCredentials(CliGitAPIImpl.java:957)
at 
org.jenkinsci.plugins.gitclient.CliGitAPIImpl.access$200(CliGitAPIImpl.java:71)
at 
org.jenkinsci.plugins.gitclient.CliGitAPIImpl$1.execute(CliGitAPIImpl.java:197)
at 
org.jenkinsci.plugins.gitclient.RemoteGitImpl$CommandInvocationHandler$1.call(RemoteGitImpl.java:152)
at 
org.jenkinsci.plugins.gitclient.RemoteGitImpl$CommandInvocationHandler$1.call(RemoteGitImpl.java:145)
at hudson.remoting.UserRequest.perform(UserRequest.java:118)
at hudson.remoting.UserRequest.perform(UserRequest.java:48)
at hudson.remoting.Request$2.run(Request.java:328)
at 
hudson.remoting.InterceptingExecutorService$1.call(InterceptingExecutorService.java:72)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:262)
at 
java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1145)
at 
java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:615)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:744)

Re: [VOTE] [RESULTS] Apache CloudStack 4.3.0 (ninth round)

2014-03-22 Thread ilya musayev 
I did find some issue - but relatively minor and nothing that could not 
have been fixed via UI.


I will open JIRA to address the issues.

In the nutshell, i noticed some UI inconsistency and the way some pages 
are presented - this is minor but the issue was seen in both latest 
Firefox and Chrome on OSX.


Another issue was related to VMware, if you define vSwitch0 under 
physical network labels for MGMT, Public, Guest and Storage, ACS 4.3 
looks for a vSwitch named "vSwitch0vSwitch0".


There is "vSwitch0" label that is defined as default in case nothing was 
supplied for vSwitch0 name - which is vSpheres default vSwitch, however, 
i decided to define it anyway to see what happens - surely enough it 
broke. It appears instead of replacing my value defined in UI, ACS 
appends my value + default value. As a result, vSwitch0vSwitch0 - is 
invalid vSwitch in VMware, and attempts to deploy SysVMs fail. I havent 
tried defining other vSwitches because all my test hypervisors only 
leverage vSwitch0.


If i undefine the vSwitch0 label, ACS then picks up proper default vSwitch0.

On 3/22/14, 3:39 AM, Wilder Rodrigues wrote:

Great news!

Have a nice weekend, guys and gals!

Cheers,
Wilder

Sent from my iPhone


On 21 Mar 2014, at 20:08, "Animesh Chaturvedi"  
wrote:



The vote has *passed* with the following results (binding PMC votes indicated with a 
"*" next to their name:

+1 : Animesh*, Edison*, Ilya*, Amogh, Wilder
+0 : Daan *
-1 : Tanner (The issue CLOUDSTACK-6266 could not be reproduced )

I'm going to proceed with moving the release into the distribution repo now and 
other release tasks.

Thanks
Animesh



-Original Message-
From: Animesh Chaturvedi [mailto:animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 12:06 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.3.0 (ninth round)




Hi All,



I've created a 4.3.0 release, with the following artifacts up for a

vote:





Git Branch and Commit SH:

https://git-wip-
us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.3
Commit:  0810029f274878eca8fd74b44ab1117054e929a5


List of changes:

New Features in 4.3: https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12325248

Improvement in 4.3: https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12325249

Issues fixed in 4.3 https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12326161

Known Issues in 4.3: https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12326162







Source release (checksums and signatures are available at the same

location):

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/cloudstack/4.3.0/



PGP release keys (signed using 94BE0D7C):

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/cloudstack/KEYS



Testing instructions are here:

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Release+test+pro
cedure



Vote will be open for 72 hours (Friday 3/21 12:05 PM PST)



For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to indicate
"(binding)" with their vote?



[ ] +1  approve

[ ] +0  no opinion

[ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)



Thanks

Animesh

[QUESTION] JavaScript Question

2014-03-22 Thread Mike Tutkowski 
Hi,

I have a JavaScript question. Of course, feel free anyone to answer it, but
I CCed Brian, Jessica, and Alena since they seem to do a lot of our GUI
work.

While testing a feature of mine for 4.4, I came across a minor GUI issue.

For 4.4 I added the ability for Compute Offerings to support Storage
Quality of Service (Qos).

>From a visual perspective, this partly entailed adding Min IOPS and Max
IOPS as options when a user selects a Compute or Disk Offering in the
process of creating a VM.

Here is how this looks for a Compute Offering:

http://i.imgur.com/2HNZ6Ta.png

For Compute Offerings, this works great as you can scroll the list of
Compute Offerings and - for the selected Compute Offering, if applicable -
you can scroll its custom compute options (Number of CPU cores, MHz, and
memory) and its storage QoS options. If storage QoS is not enabled on the
Compute Offering (or if its values are configured by the admin on the
Compute Offering), you won't see these options here (just like if custom
compute options like number of CPU cores isn't enabled for users to
configure on the Compute Offering, you won't see those options here either).

The moral of the story here is that this scrolling works great.

I noticed a minor GUI issue, however, with the equivalent functionality on
Disk Offerings:

http://i.imgur.com/HJsAhdU.png

As you can see here, the scrolling doesn't work.

I was hoping a GUI person could take a look at this for me. Nothing obvious
stuck out when I looked at index.jsp and I don't have nearly the JavaScript
experience as I have Java experience.

Thanks!
Mike

-- 
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the
cloud
*(tm)*

Re: [VOTE] [RESULTS] Apache CloudStack 4.3.0 (ninth round)

2014-03-22 Thread Animesh Chaturvedi 
Sure lets track them for 4.3.1 and 4.4

Thanks
Animesh

On Mar 22, 2014, at 3:56 PM, "ilya musayev"  
wrote:

> I did find some issue - but relatively minor and nothing that could not have 
> been fixed via UI.
> 
> I will open JIRA to address the issues.
> 
> In the nutshell, i noticed some UI inconsistency and the way some pages are 
> presented - this is minor but the issue was seen in both latest Firefox and 
> Chrome on OSX.
> 
> Another issue was related to VMware, if you define vSwitch0 under physical 
> network labels for MGMT, Public, Guest and Storage, ACS 4.3 looks for a 
> vSwitch named "vSwitch0vSwitch0".
> 
> There is "vSwitch0" label that is defined as default in case nothing was 
> supplied for vSwitch0 name - which is vSpheres default vSwitch, however, i 
> decided to define it anyway to see what happens - surely enough it broke. It 
> appears instead of replacing my value defined in UI, ACS appends my value + 
> default value. As a result, vSwitch0vSwitch0 - is invalid vSwitch in VMware, 
> and attempts to deploy SysVMs fail. I havent tried defining other vSwitches 
> because all my test hypervisors only leverage vSwitch0.
> 
> If i undefine the vSwitch0 label, ACS then picks up proper default vSwitch0.
> 
> On 3/22/14, 3:39 AM, Wilder Rodrigues wrote:
>> Great news!
>> 
>> Have a nice weekend, guys and gals!
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Wilder
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On 21 Mar 2014, at 20:08, "Animesh Chaturvedi" 
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The vote has *passed* with the following results (binding PMC votes 
>>> indicated with a "*" next to their name:
>>> 
>>> +1 : Animesh*, Edison*, Ilya*, Amogh, Wilder
>>> +0 : Daan *
>>> -1 : Tanner (The issue CLOUDSTACK-6266 could not be reproduced )
>>> 
>>> I'm going to proceed with moving the release into the distribution repo now 
>>> and other release tasks.
>>> 
>>> Thanks
>>> Animesh
>>> 
>>> 
 -Original Message-
 From: Animesh Chaturvedi [mailto:animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com]
 Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 12:06 PM
 To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
 Subject: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.3.0 (ninth round)
 
 
 
 
 Hi All,
 
 
 
 I've created a 4.3.0 release, with the following artifacts up for a
 
 vote:
 
 
 
 
 
 Git Branch and Commit SH:
 
 https://git-wip-
 us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.3
 Commit:  0810029f274878eca8fd74b44ab1117054e929a5
 
 
 List of changes:
 
 New Features in 4.3: https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12325248
 
 Improvement in 4.3: https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12325249
 
 Issues fixed in 4.3 https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12326161
 
 Known Issues in 4.3: https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12326162
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Source release (checksums and signatures are available at the same
 
 location):
 
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/cloudstack/4.3.0/
 
 
 
 PGP release keys (signed using 94BE0D7C):
 
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/cloudstack/KEYS
 
 
 
 Testing instructions are here:
 
 https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Release+test+pro
 cedure
 
 
 
 Vote will be open for 72 hours (Friday 3/21 12:05 PM PST)
 
 
 
 For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to indicate
 "(binding)" with their vote?
 
 
 
 [ ] +1  approve
 
 [ ] +0  no opinion
 
 [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
 
 
 
 Thanks
 
 Animesh
>

Re: [QUESTION] JavaScript Question

2014-03-22 Thread Mike Tutkowski 
I actually think it has to do with the CSS.

It looks like the "No Thanks" radio button's height is not taken into
consideration when we shrink the height of the Disk Offering container to
fit in the custom compute and custom storage QoS controls.

I also noticed that if you select a custom Disk Offering and - as expected
- it displays custom controls at the bottom and then you click on the "No
Thanks" radio button that the custom fields don't disappear.


On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 5:27 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I have a JavaScript question. Of course, feel free anyone to answer it,
> but I CCed Brian, Jessica, and Alena since they seem to do a lot of our GUI
> work.
>
> While testing a feature of mine for 4.4, I came across a minor GUI issue.
>
> For 4.4 I added the ability for Compute Offerings to support Storage
> Quality of Service (Qos).
>
> From a visual perspective, this partly entailed adding Min IOPS and Max
> IOPS as options when a user selects a Compute or Disk Offering in the
> process of creating a VM.
>
> Here is how this looks for a Compute Offering:
>
> http://i.imgur.com/2HNZ6Ta.png
>
> For Compute Offerings, this works great as you can scroll the list of
> Compute Offerings and - for the selected Compute Offering, if applicable -
> you can scroll its custom compute options (Number of CPU cores, MHz, and
> memory) and its storage QoS options. If storage QoS is not enabled on the
> Compute Offering (or if its values are configured by the admin on the
> Compute Offering), you won't see these options here (just like if custom
> compute options like number of CPU cores isn't enabled for users to
> configure on the Compute Offering, you won't see those options here either).
>
> The moral of the story here is that this scrolling works great.
>
> I noticed a minor GUI issue, however, with the equivalent functionality on
> Disk Offerings:
>
> http://i.imgur.com/HJsAhdU.png
>
> As you can see here, the scrolling doesn't work.
>
> I was hoping a GUI person could take a look at this for me. Nothing
> obvious stuck out when I looked at index.jsp and I don't have nearly the
> JavaScript experience as I have Java experience.
>
> Thanks!
> Mike
>
> --
> *Mike Tutkowski*
> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
> e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
> o: 303.746.7302
> Advancing the way the world uses the 
> cloud
> *(tm)*
>



-- 
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the
cloud
*(tm)*

Re: [QUESTION] JavaScript Question

2014-03-22 Thread Mike Tutkowski 
FYI that I fixed the "No Thanks" radio-button issue in both 4.4 and master.


On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:

> I actually think it has to do with the CSS.
>
> It looks like the "No Thanks" radio button's height is not taken into
> consideration when we shrink the height of the Disk Offering container to
> fit in the custom compute and custom storage QoS controls.
>
> I also noticed that if you select a custom Disk Offering and - as expected
> - it displays custom controls at the bottom and then you click on the "No
> Thanks" radio button that the custom fields don't disappear.
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 5:27 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have a JavaScript question. Of course, feel free anyone to answer it,
>> but I CCed Brian, Jessica, and Alena since they seem to do a lot of our GUI
>> work.
>>
>> While testing a feature of mine for 4.4, I came across a minor GUI issue.
>>
>> For 4.4 I added the ability for Compute Offerings to support Storage
>> Quality of Service (Qos).
>>
>> From a visual perspective, this partly entailed adding Min IOPS and Max
>> IOPS as options when a user selects a Compute or Disk Offering in the
>> process of creating a VM.
>>
>> Here is how this looks for a Compute Offering:
>>
>> http://i.imgur.com/2HNZ6Ta.png
>>
>> For Compute Offerings, this works great as you can scroll the list of
>> Compute Offerings and - for the selected Compute Offering, if applicable -
>> you can scroll its custom compute options (Number of CPU cores, MHz, and
>> memory) and its storage QoS options. If storage QoS is not enabled on the
>> Compute Offering (or if its values are configured by the admin on the
>> Compute Offering), you won't see these options here (just like if custom
>> compute options like number of CPU cores isn't enabled for users to
>> configure on the Compute Offering, you won't see those options here either).
>>
>> The moral of the story here is that this scrolling works great.
>>
>> I noticed a minor GUI issue, however, with the equivalent functionality
>> on Disk Offerings:
>>
>>  http://i.imgur.com/HJsAhdU.png
>>
>> As you can see here, the scrolling doesn't work.
>>
>> I was hoping a GUI person could take a look at this for me. Nothing
>> obvious stuck out when I looked at index.jsp and I don't have nearly the
>> JavaScript experience as I have Java experience.
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Mike
>>
>> --
>> *Mike Tutkowski*
>> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
>> e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
>> o: 303.746.7302
>> Advancing the way the world uses the 
>> cloud
>> *(tm)*
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Mike Tutkowski*
> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
> e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
> o: 303.746.7302
> Advancing the way the world uses the 
> cloud
> *(tm)*
>



-- 
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the
cloud
*(tm)*

Re: [QUESTION] JavaScript Question

2014-03-22 Thread Mike Tutkowski 
Just another comment on the "No Thanks" radio button: When it is not
present (ex. when you build a VM from an ISO), the custom compute and
custom storage QoS controls have enough space in the wizard. They are not
under the control of a scroll bar (like they are with the Compute Offering
equivalent), but they at least fit.

I'm thinking there just needs to be a tweak to the CSS, but perhaps a GUI
person can chime in on this when he/she gets a chance.

Thanks :)


On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 7:45 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:

> FYI that I fixed the "No Thanks" radio-button issue in both 4.4 and master.
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
>
>> I actually think it has to do with the CSS.
>>
>> It looks like the "No Thanks" radio button's height is not taken into
>> consideration when we shrink the height of the Disk Offering container to
>> fit in the custom compute and custom storage QoS controls.
>>
>> I also noticed that if you select a custom Disk Offering and - as
>> expected - it displays custom controls at the bottom and then you click on
>> the "No Thanks" radio button that the custom fields don't disappear.
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 5:27 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
>> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I have a JavaScript question. Of course, feel free anyone to answer it,
>>> but I CCed Brian, Jessica, and Alena since they seem to do a lot of our GUI
>>> work.
>>>
>>> While testing a feature of mine for 4.4, I came across a minor GUI issue.
>>>
>>> For 4.4 I added the ability for Compute Offerings to support Storage
>>> Quality of Service (Qos).
>>>
>>> From a visual perspective, this partly entailed adding Min IOPS and Max
>>> IOPS as options when a user selects a Compute or Disk Offering in the
>>> process of creating a VM.
>>>
>>> Here is how this looks for a Compute Offering:
>>>
>>> http://i.imgur.com/2HNZ6Ta.png
>>>
>>> For Compute Offerings, this works great as you can scroll the list of
>>> Compute Offerings and - for the selected Compute Offering, if applicable -
>>> you can scroll its custom compute options (Number of CPU cores, MHz, and
>>> memory) and its storage QoS options. If storage QoS is not enabled on the
>>> Compute Offering (or if its values are configured by the admin on the
>>> Compute Offering), you won't see these options here (just like if custom
>>> compute options like number of CPU cores isn't enabled for users to
>>> configure on the Compute Offering, you won't see those options here either).
>>>
>>> The moral of the story here is that this scrolling works great.
>>>
>>> I noticed a minor GUI issue, however, with the equivalent functionality
>>> on Disk Offerings:
>>>
>>>  http://i.imgur.com/HJsAhdU.png
>>>
>>> As you can see here, the scrolling doesn't work.
>>>
>>> I was hoping a GUI person could take a look at this for me. Nothing
>>> obvious stuck out when I looked at index.jsp and I don't have nearly the
>>> JavaScript experience as I have Java experience.
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>> Mike
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Mike Tutkowski*
>>> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
>>> e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
>>> o: 303.746.7302
>>> Advancing the way the world uses the 
>>> cloud
>>> *(tm)*
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Mike Tutkowski*
>> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
>> e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
>> o: 303.746.7302
>> Advancing the way the world uses the 
>> cloud
>> *(tm)*
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Mike Tutkowski*
> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
> e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
> o: 303.746.7302
> Advancing the way the world uses the 
> cloud
> *(tm)*
>



-- 
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the
cloud
*(tm)*

Re: [QUESTION] JavaScript Question

2014-03-22 Thread Mike Tutkowski 
By the way, when I said, "I fixed the "No Thanks" radio-button issue in
both 4.4 and master," I meant I fixed the issue where the custom compute
and/or custom storage QoS controls were not disappearing when you clicked
on the "No Thanks" radio button.


On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 7:45 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:

> FYI that I fixed the "No Thanks" radio-button issue in both 4.4 and master.
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
>
>> I actually think it has to do with the CSS.
>>
>> It looks like the "No Thanks" radio button's height is not taken into
>> consideration when we shrink the height of the Disk Offering container to
>> fit in the custom compute and custom storage QoS controls.
>>
>> I also noticed that if you select a custom Disk Offering and - as
>> expected - it displays custom controls at the bottom and then you click on
>> the "No Thanks" radio button that the custom fields don't disappear.
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 5:27 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
>> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I have a JavaScript question. Of course, feel free anyone to answer it,
>>> but I CCed Brian, Jessica, and Alena since they seem to do a lot of our GUI
>>> work.
>>>
>>> While testing a feature of mine for 4.4, I came across a minor GUI issue.
>>>
>>> For 4.4 I added the ability for Compute Offerings to support Storage
>>> Quality of Service (Qos).
>>>
>>> From a visual perspective, this partly entailed adding Min IOPS and Max
>>> IOPS as options when a user selects a Compute or Disk Offering in the
>>> process of creating a VM.
>>>
>>> Here is how this looks for a Compute Offering:
>>>
>>> http://i.imgur.com/2HNZ6Ta.png
>>>
>>> For Compute Offerings, this works great as you can scroll the list of
>>> Compute Offerings and - for the selected Compute Offering, if applicable -
>>> you can scroll its custom compute options (Number of CPU cores, MHz, and
>>> memory) and its storage QoS options. If storage QoS is not enabled on the
>>> Compute Offering (or if its values are configured by the admin on the
>>> Compute Offering), you won't see these options here (just like if custom
>>> compute options like number of CPU cores isn't enabled for users to
>>> configure on the Compute Offering, you won't see those options here either).
>>>
>>> The moral of the story here is that this scrolling works great.
>>>
>>> I noticed a minor GUI issue, however, with the equivalent functionality
>>> on Disk Offerings:
>>>
>>>  http://i.imgur.com/HJsAhdU.png
>>>
>>> As you can see here, the scrolling doesn't work.
>>>
>>> I was hoping a GUI person could take a look at this for me. Nothing
>>> obvious stuck out when I looked at index.jsp and I don't have nearly the
>>> JavaScript experience as I have Java experience.
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>> Mike
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Mike Tutkowski*
>>> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
>>> e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
>>> o: 303.746.7302
>>> Advancing the way the world uses the 
>>> cloud
>>> *(tm)*
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Mike Tutkowski*
>> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
>> e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
>> o: 303.746.7302
>> Advancing the way the world uses the 
>> cloud
>> *(tm)*
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Mike Tutkowski*
> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
> e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
> o: 303.746.7302
> Advancing the way the world uses the 
> cloud
> *(tm)*
>



-- 
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the
cloud
*(tm)*