That's such great news for the project and a strong endorsement of how we have
worked together successfully. Everyone should be so proud. Let us keep it up
as a TLP!
-kevin
> -Original Message-
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013
+1
> -Original Message-
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> Sent: Monday, March 11, 2013 9:42 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: [VOTE] Graduate Apache CloudStack from the Incubator
>
> Hi,
>
> I would like to invite the CloudStack community to
+1 (binding)
> -Original Message-
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 01, 2013 8:17 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: [VOTE] Change the project bylaws to modify the PMC Chair voting
> process and add a term length
>
> Hi all
Kevin Kluge created CLOUDSTACK-1146:
---
Summary: auto update of KVM agent
Key: CLOUDSTACK-1146
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-1146
Project: CloudStack
Issue Type: New
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-993?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Kevin Kluge reassigned CLOUDSTACK-993:
--
Assignee: Prachi Damle
> "admin" user is not getting created wh
+1 (binding)
> -Original Message-
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 7:30 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: [VOTE] Project Bylaws
>
> Hi all,
>
> We've had some good discussions on the proposed bylaws over th
This schedule gives us only 7 weeks from today to develop features, and of that
time most committers will be offline for a week or two due to holidays. Some
features have already been developed, but I don't think, relatively speaking,
much has been done in the past few weeks. Even if we adopt
I'd have a preference for 6 month releases. Releases are a lot of work and I'd
prefer to spread that over fewer iterations per year.
And I would just call them all major releases (versioning aside). I'm thinking
of something like Fedora. We can independently decide to do minor releases
(pres
+1, this is great news. Congrats to all!
-kevin
> -Original Message-
> From: Rajesh Battala [mailto:rajesh.batt...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2012 10:21 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [RESULT][VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.0.0-incubating
>
> Very
f the crowd
> rated
> themselves as users, some managers and some engineers. Most of them use
> open source technologies on daily basis and there were few who contribute to
> open source.
>
> Kevin Kluge spoke on building your own IaaS cloud with Apache CloudStack and
> g
PS: this tool looks great!
> -Original Message-
> From: Rohit Yadav [mailto:rohit.ya...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 10:59 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: [DISCUSS] Name of the CLI
>
> Hi,
>
> I've named our new CLI, cloudmonkey after our mascot
Rohit, is this the name of the project or the name of the command line tool (as
run from the shell) or both?
-kevin
> -Original Message-
> From: Rohit Yadav [mailto:rohit.ya...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 10:59 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: [
+1 to the monkey
> -Original Message-
> From: Radhika Puthiyetath [mailto:radhika.puthiyet...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2012 9:25 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Adopt the Monkey?
>
> +1 to the cloud monkey
>
> -Original Message
Who all will be there? I know David, Wido and I will be. Others? Sebastien,
are you at LinuxCon instead?
There's a series of CloudStack talks Tuesday afternoon. Anyone up for some
socializing afterwards?
-kevin
> Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 8:42 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org; Edison Su; Will Chan; Kevin Kluge;
> John Kinsella; nsla...@apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, third round
>
> Hi all,
>
> Thanks again to everyone that
+1
Important feature but IMO shouldn't hold the first release given that other
pieces are ready.
> -Original Message-
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 9:55 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: [VOTE][ASFCS40] Dro
There's nothing in CloudStack to track that so we cannot be definitive. But,
it can't be many. We have seen few questions about its usage and integration.
And OVM's share of the server virtualization market is quite low. Given
limited user impact, if this is really the only problem I'd defe
Kevin Kluge created CLOUDSTACK-367:
--
Summary: CLI
Key: CLOUDSTACK-367
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-367
Project: CloudStack
Issue Type: New Feature
Affects
I'd like to see the doc bugs that David referenced added to the bug list. I
removed one that seemed more like a format change, that leaves
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-344
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-345
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-30
I don't see how we can ship without the RPM install docs posted. Once you
build the RPMs I haven't found anything posted that tells you what to do.
Seems like many developers and all non-developers will fail at the install. Am
I missing something?
-kevin
> -Original Message-
> From
+1 (binding)
> -Original Message-
> From: chip.child...@sungard.com [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] On
> Behalf Of Chip Childers (ASF)
> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 6:21 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, firs
It will also work with the 5.6.* releases. But I'd recommend new installs
using the latest XenServer release, which is 6.0.2.
-kevin
> -Original Message-
> From: Sanjeev Neelarapu [mailto:sanjeev.neelar...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 5:26 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incub
-
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 8:33 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Cc: Ram Ganesh; Kevin Kluge
> Subject: Re: [ASF40] Trilead ssh needs to be removed.
>
> On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Brett Porter wro
't be a very long talk.
> > Most of the storage stuff is inside Ceph and for CloudStack is just an
> > integration.
> >
> > We could do a "new in 4.0" talk? I could highlight RBD and you can
> > take a bit more time for the Nicira integration?
> >
>
> Do people run Fedora on production platforms? Isn't CentOS/RHEL the
> distribution for production and Fedora for Desktops and cutting edge test
> machines?
I saw some asks for Fedora particularly before RHEL 5.6 (or perhaps 5.5) came
out, when KVM support in RHEL was quite old/poor. Since t
You can use SDN (Software Defined Networking). Salvatore sent some mails about
the work he had done which got to a beta state. It sets up zone-wide L2
overlay networks using GRE tunnels. Salvatore's work was XenServer specific
and used a controller native to CloudStack. Hugo has done some co
Chip , thanks for this proposal, I like 1 and 2. On #3, are you assuming that
in the event a team of committers and non-committers are working on a large
feature, the changesets for the feature will be applied incrementally into the
Apache repo by one of the committers? If that is the case th
> The point David also made is the question: Which platforms are we going to
> build binaries for?
>
> To put it in a simple way: "The agent is nothing more then a couple of JAR
> files which need to be run with JSVC and it needs the libvirt-java bindings to
> talk to a recent version of libvirt
> -Original Message-
> From: Edison Su [mailto:edison...@citrix.com]
>
> Maybe we can switch to Ubuntu 12.04?:
> VMware supports it:
> http://partnerweb.vmware.com/GOSIG/Ubuntu_12_04.html
> Xen/KVM supports it by default.
My recollection is that we picked Debian for stability and security.
> > On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 05:20:38AM +0100, Ewan Mellor wrote:
> > > I would like to propose that we grant CloudStack committer status to
> > > Mice Xia. Mice is regularly submitting work of high quality, and
> > would
> > > be an asset to the team.
>
> OK, in that case I propose Mice for discus
> Can we conclude this with:
>
> Supported platforms for CloudStack 4.0 KVM HyperVisors:
> - Ubuntu 12.04
> - CentOS 6.2
> - CentOS 6.3
> - RHEL 6.2
> - RHEL 6.3
Seems fine to me.
>
> If people want to run on a different platform, we require:
> - libvirt 0.9.4
>
> That is actually it, most of
>
> I believe it is already in Debian wheezy, so this is actually a backport.
> Debian backports kernel for Squeeze broke something else (will have to dig it
> up), so we couldn't use the backports kernel.
>
> What will break for folks is that:
> - if they have a Ubuntu/Debian VM co-hosted on the
Mark, thanks for sharing your thoughts. I was at OSCON and thought CloudStack
had a good booth. Everybody loved the monkey shirts! I'd also suggest
getting some cards or some such thing with the cloudstack.org URL. If I recall
correctly the monkey shirt does not have the URL. People wante
Chip, I'm always happy to get mails that show progress being made. Thanks for
all the effort on Apache CloudStack!
-kevin
> -Original Message-
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 03, 2012 12:00 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Su
I'd support doing query only. If a significant user need for SOAP emerges we
can re-evaluate with clear data on the use case or tool that needs it.
-kevin
> -Original Message-
> From: Duncan Johnston Watt
> [mailto:duncan.johnstonw...@cloudsoftcorp.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 02, 201
Marcus, you should write the new code in compliance with the Apache CLA, which
will forbid directly copying code from some other source. Having said that,
if the problem is constrained enough by existing CloudStack code and/or the
solution is so obvious that your code looks like the original c
>
> > So I think it's important to realize that the actual release is a
> > source release. That makes the question (at least in my mind) what
> > platforms will we build convenience binaries for, as I suspect anyone
> > who builds from source doesn't really care about our concepts of
> > 'supporte
> So part of me says, silencing merge/cherrypick commits is the way to go, but
> there is a part of me that says that having to hide all of that means we are
> doing something wrong; and the part of me that is concerned with what is
> going on really does want to see all of that.
I don't like the
My understanding is that the "convenience builds" can include KVM support
enabled. The source release will include the code with the build option off.
So most users won't notice any changes.
-kevin
> -Original Message-
> From: John Kinsella [mailto:j...@stratosec.co]
> Sent: Thursda
> > A talk about the difference between 3.X and 4.X and all the new
> > awesome features?
> >
> > - Storage: RBD (and Sheepdog?)
> > - Network: Nicira
> >
That'd be great. You could pair it with a roadmap / futures discussion if
time permits.
> > Or do we want to go for more integration-like t
I don't see an upside to a change. And there's clear downside from loss of
what has been built. So I view any move from "Apache CloudStack" as a
counter-productive distraction.
-kevin
> -Original Message-
> From: John Kinsella [mailto:j...@stratosec.co]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 20
Are we agreed this is the workflow -- original submitter should check and then
close as Submitted after the checkin?
We should also have the committers " use the exact phrase and author in the
commit" as David says.This seems preferable as is effectively automated.
-kevin
> -Original M
I'm surprised by the number of Pending and Submitted. I have seen so many
approval messages (I counted 48 in my quick mailbox search) that it seems odd
that only 5 patches are classified as submitted. Are people just not
completing the workflow when something gets submitted?
-kevin
> -O
> Are you saying that you think that Apache CloudStack can provide Debian-
> based systemVMs as part of a release (or in any other manner)?
> If so, I am missing something. And I would love for this to not be the case,
> I
> just don't see how we can ship a big blob of GPL software given the
> gu
> -Original Message-
> From: David Nalley [mailto:da...@gnsa.us]
> Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2012 12:02 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: ASF repo tags
>
> > How about this, just to define it (more or less what David just said):
> > * For development/feature bran
I don't see how there is a capability issue. At one time we had problems with
people not having enough space to uncompress the downloaded system VM template
during install time. We added prereqs to help avoid that problem. But I don't
see how to justify 250 GB.
> -Original Message-
>
I had mentioned this concern (licensing and system VM presence) in the earliest
Apache discussions, and I included it in the CloudStack project proposal at
[1]. I had been told that it was a non-issue. That is, as long as the code in
our repo is of allowed license this dependency is fine, and
Anthony, would you be able to reach out to the Xen Community to see if they
will take this upstream, or introduce a config that allows it to be disabled?
-kevin
> -Original Message-
> From: Anthony Xu [mailto:xuefei...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2012 12:56 PM
> To: clouds
I understood GCC to have a AL 2.0 license and to be used by the UI, as
described in [1]. So it should at least be acceptable per license. I don't
see why it has to be kept in the source tree but a removal of it should also
include build changes to download a known-stable version for use in t
I've heard some requests for that and I do think it would be a good feature.
CloudBridge is notably different from site-site VPN though. It works at layer
2, does WAN optimization, and requires CloudBridge at both ends of the
connection.
-kevin
> -Original Message-
> From: Clement Ch
Rajesh, can you provide some rationale for this choice versus other options.
-kevin
> -Original Message-
> From: Rajesh Battala [mailto:rajesh.batt...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 10:44 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Hibernate
>
> Hi,
>
> I h
There's some detail on this at
http://confluence.cloudstack.org/display/dev/Moving+dependencies+to+ASF+approved+licenses.
> -Original Message-
> From: Frank Zhang [mailto:frank.zh...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 3:36 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: R
d i choose equallogic for
> thin provisioning feature.
>
> Any of you can setup a test environment ?
>
>
> Diego
>
>
> 2012/6/20 Kevin Kluge
>
> > All of the EqualLogic deployments I'm aware of export iSCSI LUNs to
> > CloudStack and add the pri
Kimi, create a ticket for INFRA at http://issues.apache.org. following the
convention with cn this would create cloudstack-users...@incubator.apache.org.
-kevin
> -Original Message-
> From: Kimihiko Kitase [mailto:kimihiko.kit...@citrix.co.jp]
> Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 9:15 PM
>
Lu, you might visit UShareSoft. See http://www.usharesoft.com/appstore.
-kevin
> -Original Message-
> From: Lu Heng [mailto:h...@anytimechinese.com]
> Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2012 10:27 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Cloudstack pre-configed template
>
> Hi
I haven't heard of anyone working on it. Please don't hesitate to start the
effort.:)
-kevin
> -Original Message-
> From: Xin Liu [mailto:codeoe...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 5:09 PM
> To: Kevin Kluge
> Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
All of the EqualLogic deployments I'm aware of export iSCSI LUNs to CloudStack
and add the primary storage as type iSCSI in CloudStack. There's a wide
variety of storage used in production with CloudStack, but EqualLogic is one of
the more popular options. I haven't heard of anyone using Stor
I've heard the request before several times. But I don't know of anyone
working on it. I don't recall seeing further messages from the original poster
on that thread.
-kevin
> -Original Message-
> From: Edison Su [mailto:edison...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 1:26 PM
> -Original Message-
> From: David Nalley [mailto:da...@gnsa.us]
> Sent: Monday, June 18, 2012 2:20 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Patches review
>
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Adrian Cole
> wrote:
> > +1 gerrit, particularly as it helps avoid additional
Lu,
When Citrix submitted CloudStack to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) it
also included the trademark. The trademark has not been assigned to the ASF
yet, but Citrix is trying to operate as if it were. As a result Citrix had to
create a new product name for the commercial (paid) softw
+1
> -Original Message-
> From: Ewan Mellor [mailto:ewan.mel...@eu.citrix.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 12:15 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: OCSON
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: David Nalley [mailto:da...@gnsa.us]
> > Sent: Thursday, June 14
Can we have the maintainers take responsibility for the incoming patch stream
right away?
-kevin
> -Original Message-
> From: Will Chan [mailto:will.c...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 4:46 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Maintainer/committer model
I think it's unreasonable to ask people to change their mail infrastructure.
Even client change is quite annoying. So +1 on anything other than e-mail.
I would also add that I've found it difficult to track what has been applied
and what hasn't. Maybe when the maintainer system is fully impl
Yes, Citrix CloudPlatform is based on Apache CloudStack. You can download it
from www.citrix.com.
Suggest we take any further commercial discussion off list…
-kevin
From: d...@soleks.com [mailto:d...@soleks.com]
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 11:24 AM
To: Kevin Kluge
Cc: cloudstack-dev
.
-kevin
From: d...@soleks.com [mailto:d...@soleks.com]
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 10:52 AM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org; Kevin Kluge
Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: BIG-IP F5 support in cloud stack 3.0.x
Hi Kevin,
Thanks for reply. My CS installation is domain
Dan, when we did the original F5 support in 2010 we decided not to use the
domain concept. It didn't scale very well. IIRC there were at most 256
domains per device (mapping to 256 virtual networks in CloudStack terminology).
This would have underutilized the device. I would suggest investig
Rajesh, do you think it's limited in the sense of number of test cases and/or
coverage?If not, what do you mean by 'limited'?
-kevin
> -Original Message-
> From: Rajesh Battala [mailto:rajesh.batt...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 8:39 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.a
Eric, hopefully someone else will chime in on technical accuracy of your mail.
In terms of process for submitting patches please take a look at
http://wiki.cloudstack.org/display/dev/Git+workflow+in+the+brave+new+world. If
that doc isn't clear please say so. It's a new doc and few have follow
> >>
> >> Well, that's kind off a Citrix question. Is Citrix interested in
> >> having a public branch to work in? From a community perspective it
> >> woudl appear that only the master branch is of interest plus any
> >> feature branches that are public.
> >
> > I don't get the Citrix question?
>
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
> 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
Also, I think we should take the pre-existing release codenames (Bonita,
Burbank, and Campo) and reserve them for Citrix commercial releases. The
community is moving to a different release cycle (with presumably different
release content) than Citrix had planned, and of course it can come up w
Alex Huang and I are in Beijing for a CloudStack dev camp and a couple of
presentations at the China Cloud Computing Conference. The dev camp was
Tuesday at a local hotel. We had 75 registrations and 73 actual attendees,
including several people that flew in from various parts of China. Ale
Pradeep, generally anything that goes into 3.0.x should also go into master.
3.0.x is the stable branch and master will most likely be the basis for future,
major releases. Obviously we don't want regressions in future releases so we
have to ensure every change in 3.0.x either goes into maste
Adrian, do you have specific list calls that are not backwards compatible from
3.0.x to 2.2.x?I thought we had made the end-user API backwards compatible
(assuming IDs are strings...).
-kevin
> -Original Message-
> From: fernc...@gmail.com [mailto:fernc...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> > > 3.) Has a code-coverage tool (e.g. Cobertura) been run on the
> > > CloudStack source tree?
> > >
> >
> > We don't have code-coverage enabled. But would love to have it!
> >
I'm fairly sure we ran it some time ago. But it has not been run regularly,
and with the new automation framework a
David, I had assumed that we could just get this library released under AL2 and
bundle the jar with CloudStack. It'd be great if distros picked it up but
that seems more difficult and longer term than a re-license, given our ability
to influence the license of this particular piece of software
Yes please, keep filing the bugs! A lot of work went into 3.0.x to fix the
most common cases of "X does not work so I need to go edit the db". We have to
keep rooting out these problems.
-kevin
> -Original Message-
> From: Charles Russell [mailto:charles.russ...@kisinc.net]
> Sent: M
Mohammad, these ICLAs were all mailed or faxed in several weeks ago. I will
investigate what happened.
-kevin
> -Original Message-
> From: nour.moham...@gmail.com [mailto:nour.moham...@gmail.com]
> On Behalf Of Mohammad Nour El-Din
> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 7:37 AM
> To: cloudstack
> -Original Message-
> From: Nitin Mehta [mailto:nitin.me...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Monday, May 07, 2012 7:57 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org; Ram Chinta
> Cc: David Nalley; Anthony Xu
> Subject: RE: Secondary nfs server alert issue
>
> Just to add to it I had raised another UI
> The particular behavior in question is how we handle provisioning instances
> that don't have a matching tag. Today, you might not have that
> 'really_really_fast' tag but your machine might still end up on the
> 'really_really_fast'-tagged storage. (e.g. the tagged resources aren't
> exclusively
Matt, thanks much for your attendance. This was a great introduction to
Apache for the attendees.
We'll continue with day two tomorrow. All are welcome, even if you missed the
first day. The second day will be more code-oriented.
-kevin
> -Original Message-
> From: Matt Hogstrom
ng a zone, then configuring the physical network outside of the
> wizard.
>
> Will
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Kevin Kluge [mailto:kevin.kl...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 9:56 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org; Salvatore Orlando
> Subje
Will, I think Abhi and David and I are all in sync -- telling people that they
need to know how a given cloud is taking passwords is really broken. I can't
think of any precedent for this in any other software I've seen with pluggable
auth backends. If I were a client developer and faced with
2/12 6:40 AM, "Salvatore Orlando"
> wrote:
>
> >I believe it is used as a default setting for all clusters in the zone.
> >But then you are still free to override that setting for specific
> >clusters.
> >
> >Salvatore
> >
> >> -Ori
When you add a zone in 3.0.x there is a field for Hypervisor. Why is that?
Hi Alex, glad to hear you think the community is working well. We followed
the template that was pre-existing and added content to it. Personally I
think it's fine, but this is my first involvement in producing this report so
would certainly appreciate feedback.
-kevin
> -Original Mess
y and keeps the password
> >safe as is done by countless other websites taking plaintext passwords
> >from the users.
> >
> >With plaintext passwords cloudstack can now seamlessly work with
> >external authentication systems as well. With this we do not need a new
>
report for May 2012 ([ppmc])
>
>
> On 01/05/2012, at 4:34 AM, Kevin Kluge wrote:
>
> > I haven't seen changes to our board report in a few days. Can we get one
> of the mentors to sign off on it?
>
> I'll take a look.
>
> >
> > We could discu
I haven't seen changes to our board report in a few days. Can we get one of
the mentors to sign off on it?
We could discuss the "top 3" issues blocking graduation. I wish we could do
4. I'd like to add that we need to remove the non-ASF-approved license code
from the project as it's clearl
d.
-kevin
> -Original Message-
> From: Will Chan
> Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2012 4:39 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org; Kevin Kluge
> Subject: RE: user credntials
>
> The service provider (or whomever is hosting CloudStack) needs to make
> that decision. Usi
How would an API client know to use cleartext or MD5 hash?
> -Original Message-
> From: Abhinandan Prateek
> Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2012 7:56 AM
> To: Kevin Kluge; cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: user credntials
>
> In 2.2.* we were passing MD5
Abhi, is this a backwards incompatible API change? Also, what does it mean
for upgrade?
I thought we always sent MD5 hashed passwords from UI to MS. Can you explain
the change a bit more?
-kevin
> -Original Message-
> From: Abhinandan Prateek
> Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2012 12:14
Marlon, you can do those both in an advanced zone. Just set up virtual
networking with virtual router as usual. Then you can add additional networks
with named VLANs for direct attached usage. A given VM can even be on both
networks with 2+ NICs.
-kevin
> -Original Message-
> From:
Certainly everyone is welcome.
-kevin
> -Original Message-
> From: Matt Hogstrom [mailto:hogst...@apache.org]
> Sent: Monday, April 23, 2012 12:30 PM
> To: Kevin Kluge
> Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org; Brett Porter; Alex Karasulu; Jim
> Jagielski; Daniel Kulp;
I added a small comment with a third major goal for us to track.
> -Original Message-
> From: David Nalley [mailto:da...@gnsa.us]
> Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2012 11:18 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Podling Report for May 2012 due in 10 days
>
> Hi folks,
>
> Our
Moving over to the public mailing list.
Salvatore, which branch were you working on?
-kevin
From: Salvatore Orlando
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2012 8:34 AM
Subject: Code vs DB version
I had the following error while starting up the management server with fresh
code and pre-existing db:
2012-04-23
Alessandro, one other question -- can you explain the rationale for managing
Hyper-V directly, as opposed to going through SCVMM? CloudStack's VMware
integration goes through vCenter. We chose that model since we heard from
users that VMware administrators liked using vCenter as a management p
gst...@apache.org]
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 7:00 PM
To: Kevin Kluge
Cc: Brett Porter; Alex Karasulu; Jim Jagielski; Daniel Kulp; ol...@apache.org;
David Nalley; Mohammad Nour El-Din
Subject: Re: CloudStack training and the Apache way
I can give you some insight on how things worked for apac
Yes, very interesting. Can you elaborate on the getThumbnail function. One
issue we have been thinking about with Hyper-V is how to do guest console
display (console proxy functionality, in CloudStack terms). Since only RDP is
available with Hyper-V, and CloudStack knows only VNC, we've bee
100 matches
Mail list logo
