From: Anthony Xu [mailto:xuefei...@citrix.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2012 12:56 PM
> > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] tools directory
> >
> > vhd-util uses local time as timestamp when creating vhd, it may be
> okay with
>
On 07/06/2012 01:31 PM, David Nalley wrote:
On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 1:07 PM, Robert Schweikert wrote:
On 07/06/2012 12:54 PM, Kevin Kluge wrote:
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
On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 1:07 PM, Robert Schweikert wrote:
> On 07/06/2012 12:54 PM, Kevin Kluge wrote:
>>
>> 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 s
On 07/06/2012 12:54 PM, Kevin Kluge wrote:
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
6 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] tools directory
>
> vhd-util uses local time as timestamp when creating vhd, it may be okay with
> XenServer, but in cloudstack, vhd files are moved around to different cluster,
> the timestamp in vhd may be after t
com]
> Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2012 11:02 AM
> To: CloudStack DeveloperList
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] tools directory
>
>
>
> On 7/4/12 10:12 PM, "Prasanna Santhanam"
>
> wrote:
>
> >On Wed, Jul 04, 2012 at 04:20:35PM -0400, David Nalley wrote:
> &
Yeah. As long as it's not removed from older branches, it should be ok.
--Alex
> -Original Message-
> From: David Nalley [mailto:da...@gnsa.us]
> Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2012 3:20 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] tools director
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Alex Huang wrote:
>> Migration: this is/was a tool to assist 1.0.x -> 2.1.x migration. Can be
>> nuked
>
> No no。 We can't nuke this one. There are still 1.0.x deployments out there.
> This is their only way to upgrade.
>
But wouldn't they have to move to 2.x
> > Migration: this is/was a tool to assist 1.0.x -> 2.1.x migration. Can
> > be nuked
>
> No no。 We can't nuke this one. There are still 1.0.x deployments out there.
> This is their only way to upgrade.
We can maintain it in somewhere but not ASF repo. It uses some python library
against ASF
> Migration: this is/was a tool to assist 1.0.x -> 2.1.x migration. Can be nuked
No no。 We can't nuke this one. There are still 1.0.x deployments out there.
This is their only way to upgrade.
> ant: sure -- your dev OS should have it, unless hudson/jenkins relies on this
> folder
> gcc: this
timestamp check, which might not be acceptable for xen community.
It is not in upstream.
Anthony
> -Original Message-
> From: David Nalley [mailto:da...@gnsa.us]
> Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2012 12:11 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS]
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 3:07 PM, Anthony Xu wrote:
>> vhd-tools,
>
> We have some patches in this directory.
> You may need put this directory somewhere else if you want to remove it from
> ASF.
>
> Anthony
Have they been upstreamed??
--David
> vhd-tools,
We have some patches in this directory.
You may need put this directory somewhere else if you want to remove it from
ASF.
Anthony
> -Original Message-
> From: David Nalley [mailto:da...@gnsa.us]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2012 1:21 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.
Please leave Selenium related tools in place. We may revive this for UI
automation in future.
-Original Message-
From: Chiradeep Vittal [mailto:chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2012 11:02 AM
To: CloudStack DeveloperList
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] tools directory
On
>
> On 7/4/12 10:12 PM, "Prasanna Santhanam"
>
> wrote:
>
> >On Wed, Jul 04, 2012 at 04:20:35PM -0400, David Nalley wrote:
> >> Hi folks,
> >>
> >> I spent some time poking around in the tools directory.
> >>
> >> There are a number of software packages in this directory, and I am
> >> not sure
On 7/4/12 10:12 PM, "Prasanna Santhanam"
wrote:
>On Wed, Jul 04, 2012 at 04:20:35PM -0400, David Nalley wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> I spent some time poking around in the tools directory.
>>
>> There are a number of software packages in this directory, and I am
>> not sure that it is appropriat
On Wed, Jul 04, 2012 at 04:20:35PM -0400, David Nalley wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I spent some time poking around in the tools directory.
>
> There are a number of software packages in this directory, and I am
> not sure that it is appropriate to have them there, and specifically
> some of them are p
+1
Just noticed some of those myself and was wondering about that.
On Jul 4, 2012, at 1:20 PM, David Nalley wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I spent some time poking around in the tools directory.
>
> There are a number of software packages in this directory, and I am
> not sure that it is appropriate to
18 matches
Mail list logo
