[RESULTS][VOTE] Release Apache CloudStack 4.3.1 round #4

2014-09-14 Thread sebgoa 
Hi all,

After 72 hours, the vote for CloudStack 4.3.1 *passes* with 3 PMC votes and 2 
non-PMC votes.
I could not count Wei and Erik, who did not specifically vote.

+1 (PMC / binding)
Wido
Mike T.
Ilya

+1 (non-binding)
Rohit
Nux

Thanks to everyone participating.

I will now prepare the release announcement to go out after 24 hours to give 
the mirrors time to catch up.



-Sebastien


On Sep 13, 2014, at 6:13 PM, ilya musayev  wrote:

> Upgraded one of my test environments, no issues found so far +1 binding.
> On 9/11/14, 4:07 PM, Mike Tutkowski wrote:
>> Based on my regression testing, I am +1.
>> 
>> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 1:50 PM, Sebastien Goasguen 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Sep 11, 2014, at 3:47 PM, Mike Tutkowski 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
 OK, I looked into this more.
 
 It turns out the regression test that was failing is only valid in 4.4
>>> and
 beyond, so it is not a valid test for 4.3.
 
>>> so can you vote ? we need your binding vote :)
>>> 
 On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 11:14 AM, Mike Tutkowski <
 mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
 
> I have an integration test failing when trying to create a (XenServer)
> storage repository.
> 
> Let me look into it for an hour or so and then I can respond back as to
>>> if
> it's a code issue.
> 
> I'm thinking now it's a problem with XAPI. At first the code wasn't
> compiling due to XAPI changes and now I'm getting this XAPI issue when
> trying to create a storage repository. Seems possibly related.
> 
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 10:37 AM, Erik Weber 
>>> wrote:
>> Except heartbleed fix.
>> 
>> I was merely checking if it's even poosible to do an automated upgrade.
>> 
>> The way i know the upgrade process we add some sql magic to check for
>>> new
>> systemvm templates. If that's not made for 4.3.1 it won't do much good
>>> to
>> add it as systemvm-hypervisor-version.
>> 
>> Erik
>> 11. sep. 2014 15:45 skrev "Wei ZHOU"  følgende:
>> 
>>> As far as I know, there is no systemvm change during upgrade from
>>> 4.3.0
>> to
>>> 4.3.1
>>> 
>>> 2014-09-11 15:22 GMT+02:00 Erik Weber :
>>> 
 On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Nux!  wrote:
 
> Hello,
> 
> I've upgraded and it looks ok for now.
> I have used these system VMs
> 
>> http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/view/4.3/job/cloudstack-4.3-systemvm/
>>> and
> added them as systemvm-kvm-4.3 in the Templates.
> I expected them to replace SystemVM Template (KVM), but they are
>> still
> listed as systemvm-kvm-4.3 alongside the old ones.
> Other than that everything seems ok for now.
> 
> 
 Is there an upgrade path from 4.3.0 systemvm template to 4.3.1? Log
>>> on
>>> to a
 newly deployed one and check /etc/cloudstack-version
 
 --
 Erik
 
> 
> 
> --
> *Mike Tutkowski*
> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
> e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
> o: 303.746.7302
> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
> *™*
> 
 
 
 --
 *Mike Tutkowski*
 *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
 e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
 o: 303.746.7302
 Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
 *™*
>>> 
>> 
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache CloudStack 4.3.1 round #4

2014-09-14 Thread Chiradeep Vittal 
+1 (binding)
Tested RHEL 6.3 MS with XS 6.2 (fresh install). Followed test procedure 
(s/4.3.0/4.3.1) to verify bits and hash. 

--
Chiradeep

> On Sep 11, 2014, at 1:02 PM, "Sebastien Goasguen"  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Sep 11, 2014, at 3:56 PM, Wei ZHOU  wrote:
>> 
>> Sorry I just notice Rohit made a systemvm template change (commit
>> 3a0f1550289a8a2a50b0f786821cec2e5c914e62) on 9th, September.
>> The systemvm template will be built based on debian 7.5.0 instead of 7.4.0
> 
> Wei, can you test and vote ? that would be great
> 
>> 
>> 
>> ==
>> 
>> commit 3a0f1550289a8a2a50b0f786821cec2e5c914e62
>> Author: Rohit Yadav 
>> Date:   Tue Sep 9 18:37:15 2014 +0200
>> 
>>   appliance: fix newer debian iso links and checksums for debian
>> 
>>   Signed-off-by: Rohit Yadav 
>>   (cherry picked from commit ac5309b8b47ddb1e5588a2d5090f2bcce0e7c2a4)
>> 
>>   Conflicts:
>>   tools/appliance/definitions/systemvm64template/definition.rb
>>   tools/appliance/definitions/systemvmtemplate/definition.rb
>> 
>> diff --git a/tools/appliance/definitions/systemvm64template/definition.rb
>> b/tools/appliance/definitions/systemvm64template/definition.rb
>> index f9308a0..bd59025 100644
>> --- a/tools/appliance/definitions/systemvm64template/definition.rb
>> +++ b/tools/appliance/definitions/systemvm64template/definition.rb
>> @@ -3,9 +3,9 @@ Veewee::Definition.declare({
>>  :memory_size=> '256',
>>  :disk_size => '2500', :disk_format => 'VDI', :hostiocache => 'off',
>>  :os_type_id => 'Debian_64',
>> -  :iso_file => "debian-7.4.0-amd64-netinst.iso",
>> -  :iso_src => "
>> http://cdimage.debian.org/mirror/cdimage/archive/7.4.0/amd64/iso-cd/debian-7.4.0-amd64-netinst.iso
>> ",
>> -  :iso_md5 => "e7e9433973f082a297793c3c5010b2c5",
>> +  :iso_file => "debian-7.5.0-amd64-netinst.iso",
>> +  :iso_src => "
>> http://cdimage.debian.org/mirror/cdimage/archive/7.5.0/amd64/iso-cd/debian-7.5.0-amd64-netinst.iso
>> ",
>> +  :iso_md5 => "8fdb6715228ea90faba58cb84644d296",
>>  :iso_download_timeout => "1000",
>>  :boot_wait => "10", :boot_cmd_sequence => [
>> '',
>> diff --git a/tools/appliance/definitions/systemvmtemplate/definition.rb
>> b/tools/appliance/definitions/systemvmtemplate/definition.rb
>> index fcaab4d..9b57379 100644
>> --- a/tools/appliance/definitions/systemvmtemplate/definition.rb
>> +++ b/tools/appliance/definitions/systemvmtemplate/definition.rb
>> @@ -3,9 +3,9 @@ Veewee::Definition.declare({
>>  :memory_size=> '256',
>>  :disk_size => '2500', :disk_format => 'VDI', :hostiocache => 'off',
>>  :os_type_id => 'Debian',
>> -  :iso_file => "debian-7.4.0-i386-netinst.iso",
>> -  :iso_src => "
>> http://cdimage.debian.org/mirror/cdimage/archive/7.4.0/i386/iso-cd/debian-7.4.0-i386-netinst.iso
>> ",
>> -  :iso_md5 => "7339b668a81b417ac023d73739dc6a03",
>> +  :iso_file => "debian-7.5.0-i386-netinst.iso",
>> +  :iso_src => "
>> http://cdimage.debian.org/mirror/cdimage/archive/7.5.0/i386/iso-cd/debian-7.5.0-i386-netinst.iso
>> ",
>> +  :iso_md5 => "0e6eaacb5a5828473afe90f6df9c8f16",
>>  :iso_download_timeout => "1000",
>>  :boot_wait => "10", :boot_cmd_sequence => [
>> '',
>> 
>> 
>> 2014-09-11 21:50 GMT+02:00 Sebastien Goasguen :
>> 
>>> 
>>> On Sep 11, 2014, at 3:47 PM, Mike Tutkowski 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
 OK, I looked into this more.
 
 It turns out the regression test that was failing is only valid in 4.4
>>> and
 beyond, so it is not a valid test for 4.3.
>>> 
>>> so can you vote ? we need your binding vote :)
>>> 
 On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 11:14 AM, Mike Tutkowski <
 mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
 
> I have an integration test failing when trying to create a (XenServer)
> storage repository.
> 
> Let me look into it for an hour or so and then I can respond back as to
>>> if
> it's a code issue.
> 
> I'm thinking now it's a problem with XAPI. At first the code wasn't
> compiling due to XAPI changes and now I'm getting this XAPI issue when
> trying to create a storage repository. Seems possibly related.
> 
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 10:37 AM, Erik Weber 
>>> wrote:
> 
>> Except heartbleed fix.
>> 
>> I was merely checking if it's even poosible to do an automated upgrade.
>> 
>> The way i know the upgrade process we add some sql magic to check for
>>> new
>> systemvm templates. If that's not made for 4.3.1 it won't do much good
>>> to
>> add it as systemvm-hypervisor-version.
>> 
>> Erik
>> 11. sep. 2014 15:45 skrev "Wei ZHOU"  følgende:
>> 
>>> As far as I know, there is no systemvm change during upgrade from
>>> 4.3.0
>> to
>>> 4.3.1
>>> 
>>> 2014-09-11 15:22 GMT+02:00 Erik Weber :
>>> 
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Nux!  wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I've upgraded and it looks ok for now.
> I have used these system VMs
>> http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/view/4.3/job/cloudstack-4.3-systemvm/
>>> and
> added

Re: Question about Marvin

2014-09-14 Thread Gaurav Aradhye 
Hi Mike,

If you are talking about the code in base.py file, the classes and methods
contained within are written manually.

Regards,
Gaurav

On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I was wondering, do we leverage a code generator at all for building parts
> of the Marvin codebase or is code like "StoragePool" all written manually?
>
> Thanks!
>
> --
> *Mike Tutkowski*
> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
> e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
> o: 303.746.7302
> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
> *™*
>

Jenkins build is still unstable: simulator-singlerun #356

2014-09-14 Thread jenkins 
See