I don't know if your date projections are any good but +1 to the overall
ideas you pose here ,John. As was mentioned in the other thread I would
include API refactor in one of the two (5- or 6.0.0)
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 2:39 AM, John Burwell
wrote:
> All,
>
> We have been discussing whether or
Github user kishankavala commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1581
@pdube though the fix looks good, the root of the issue is different.
Earlier when bash scripts were used to configure rules on VR, iptable rules
for ACLs were inserted (-I option).
All,
We have been discussing whether or not the next release would introduce the
need to increment the major revision number from 4 to 5 (i.e. become 5.0.0).
While I think we are very close to the time to have a 5.0.0 release, I don’t
think the next release will introduce any backwards compati
I agree and support John's comments below.
Regards
ilya
On 6/14/16 2:44 PM, John Burwell wrote:
> All,
>
> Completely agree with Daan. Per semantic versioning, a major revision
> increase must introduce a backwards incompatible change in the public API,
> removal of one of more supported devi
All,
Completely agree with Daan. Per semantic versioning, a major revision increase
must introduce a backwards incompatible change in the public API, removal of
one of more supported devices, reduction in the list of supported
distributions. I agree that when we require Java8+, drop Ubuntu 12
GitHub user dcarbone opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1591
Updating Alert codes
Updating codes per values present here:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/blob/4.8/api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/alert/AlertService.java#L39
You can merge this pull re
+1 Daan.
My recollection was that major version number changes were only to be triggered
by breaks in backward compatibility (API).
Kind regards,
Paul Angus
paul.an...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
-Original Message-
Thanks Rafael! My bad, it was '.postinst' extension instead of
'.postinstall'
2016-06-14 12:37 GMT-03:00 Rafael Fonseca :
> Hey Nicolas,
>
> The .install file should be used by dpkg when the deb packages are built
> with dpkg-buildpackage, i don't know about .postinstall extension, usually
> you
Hey Nicolas,
The .install file should be used by dpkg when the deb packages are built
with dpkg-buildpackage, i don't know about .postinstall extension, usually
you have to specify post-install scripts somewhere.. a grep -r on the code
base should expose if that postinstall file is called from deb
Hi all,
A quick question: Where are 'debian/cloudstack-management.install' and
'debian/cloudstack-management.postinstall' files used? I see the first one
declares folders to be created but I don't know where is this file used.
Thanks,
Nicolas
You know that would require more then one byte for our minor version, Will.
I would be very pleased to go to 5.0 before that time.
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 3:43 PM, Will Stevens wrote:
> Daan is just trying to get us to version 4.256. :P
>
> *Will STEVENS*
> Lead Developer
>
> *CloudOps* *| *Clo
Daan is just trying to get us to version 4.256. :P
*Will STEVENS*
Lead Developer
*CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 9:41 AM, Daan Hoogland
wrote:
> -1 to what Wido said. None of those
-1 to what Wido said. None of those points warant a major release number
upgrade. these should all be in 4.10, -.11, -12 etc.
major incompatibilities like API refactor, dropping backend support for
this or that hyporvisor or DB refactor are the things that warrant 5.0,
IMNSHO
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016
Github user NuxRo commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1547
+1 merging, I'm also interested in this if it affects Advanced zone +
Security Groups.
Will test ASAP.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply ap
Github user swill commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1581
### CI RESULTS
```
Tests Run: 85
Skipped: 0
Failed: 0
Errors: 0
Duration: 4h 01m 52s
```
**Associated Uploads**
**`/tm
Github user swill commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1547
@ustcweizhou I can't wait forever on this. What I will likely do if I don't
hear back from you is merge this and then cut the RC right away. I am hoping to
cut the RC tomorrow, so if you can give
+1. :)
On Jun 14, 2016 5:07 AM, "Wido den Hollander" wrote:
>
> > Op 14 juni 2016 om 10:55 schreef Rajani Karuturi :
> >
> >
> > 4.10 or 5.0?
> >
>
> I would say 4.10
>
> > We are in the 4.* release cycle from a long time.
> > Just wanted to check if anyone is planning on major changes which
> wa
+1 to what Wido said.
I think we should not be incrementing the major version unless we're breaking
compatibility, introducing major UI/API/db changes.
Regards,
Rohit Yadav
rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
On Jun 14 2
+1 what Wido said
--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
Nux!
www.nux.ro
- Original Message -
> From: "Wido den Hollander"
> To: "Rajani Karuturi" , dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Sent: Tuesday, 14 June, 2016 10:07:01
> Subject: Re: 4.9+ release
>> Op 14 juni 2016 om 10:55
> Op 14 juni 2016 om 10:55 schreef Rajani Karuturi :
>
>
> 4.10 or 5.0?
>
I would say 4.10
> We are in the 4.* release cycle from a long time.
> Just wanted to check if anyone is planning on major changes which warrants
> 5.0
>
5.0 should imho be:
- Java 8
- Ubuntu 16.04 / systemd support
4.10 or 5.0?
We are in the 4.* release cycle from a long time.
Just wanted to check if anyone is planning on major changes which warrants
5.0
~Rajani
21 matches
Mail list logo
