On Wednesday, May 30, 2012 at 12:32 PM, Frank Zhang wrote:
> I have some different thoughts here
>
> > On Tuesday, May 29, 2012 at 10:29 PM, Alex Huang wrote:
> >
> > > CloudStack is built as a product with modularity enforced by interfaces.
> > > It
> > had its own component management via Comp
The master branch hasn't diverged much from the 3.0.x branch at this point. I
can't name any divergence off the top of my head. I would expect 3.0.x to be
more stable, but if there is another reason to go forth with master then I
wouldn't stop that for stability reasons.
> New features going
> > Today, CS uses 5.6.100 iirc - in my mind it makes sense to use the
> latest and
> > greatest - but I also am not maintaining the code that does the work.
> Perhaps
> > they will weigh in on the matter.
>
> Anthony, can you comment on this? The question goes back to Mike's
> earlier question:
> I can't speak for the folks at the ASF - perhaps asking on legal@ or filing a
> bug
> in Legal's Jira instance would get you a more qualified response. My question
> on this would be - is there any reason not to release the generating code?
I don't see why the generating code needs to be releas
>
> On May 31, 2012, at 0:59 AM, Frank Zhang wrote:
>
> > Another problem I want to raise here is the class loader issue.
> > There are bunch of places in CloudStack using Class.forName(), I am sure
> ClassNotFoundException would then be our best friend.
>
> Class.forName() in general won't work
On May 31, 2012, at 0:59 AM, Frank Zhang wrote:
> Another problem I want to raise here is the class loader issue.
> There are bunch of places in CloudStack using Class.forName(), I am sure
> ClassNotFoundException would then be our best friend.
Class.forName() in general won't work in OSGi, that
Another problem I want to raise here is the class loader issue.
There are bunch of places in CloudStack using Class.forName(), I am sure
ClassNotFoundException would then be our best friend.
> -Original Message-
> From: Frank Zhang [mailto:frank.zh...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 30
Think this was intended for -dev
-- Forwarded message --
From: Adrian Cole
Date: Wed, May 30, 2012 at 3:59 PM
Subject: vmtemplate.status values?
To: cloudstack-us...@incubator.apache.org
In jclouds, we are trying to make a status checker for templates
created. Â Part of this is
I will take that. My first comment is to introduce new NettyAgentManager
implementations rather than changing the original one and then just change the
DefaultComponentLibrary to point to the new NettyAgentManager. That way we can
make it official once we have more testing but still can fall b
Chiradeep, Alex:
Would one of you mind taking a look at this patch and provide a
review. It's a pretty sizable change.
It's been sitting around without comment for almost two weeks.
--David
On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 1:01 AM, David Nalley wrote:
> Sorry - this is the message that should have hit
Alex, one of the mentors, pointed me to this thread. I've been doing OSGi
projects for over 10 years now and am involved in Felix, ACE and Celix (all
OSGi related projects here at Apache).
> From: Alex Huang
>
> CloudStack is built as a product with modularity enforced by interfaces. It
> ha
Hi folks,
I probably should have started this discussion a few days back. We
currently have two branches in the repo 3.0.x and master, and we need
to decide what we want to base 4.0.0 on.
My personal take:
We should take 3.0.x and run with it - it has a minimum of new
features over the last Cloud
I have some different thoughts here
> On Tuesday, May 29, 2012 at 10:29 PM, Alex Huang wrote:
>
> > CloudStack is built as a product with modularity enforced by interfaces. It
> had its own component management via ComponentLocator. While that
> framework made it easy for a small group of develop
All XenServer releases include vhd-util, in that version it saves local time as
timestamp in VHD file, it is probably okay with XenServer.
But with CloudStack, CloudStack may move VHD file around to XenServer with
different time zone, XenServer may think the VHD file is broken because
the timest
Hi all,
I was looking in scripts/vm/hypervisor/xenserver/ when I noticed that
the vhd-util file is actually a compiled binary. So, my questions are:
1) If this program is necessary, then is there a better way to include
it in the source tree? Either as a dependency, or as source directly?
2) Is t
This is a very timely discussion indeed… I had a recent discussion with
several others in the jclouds community about how interesting it would be to
rework Cloudstack on an osgi component model. So it seems this is not just a
fantasy? ;-) I would love to help with this effort so I will happi
16 matches
Mail list logo
