oh wait, is there any word saying removing the support for centos7 with
stock qemu ?
-Wei
On Wed, 2 Mar 2022 at 07:38, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> I had assumed this was a non-technical discussion/vote where the changes
> are made in docs on suggested changes to how CloudStack is deployed and
> used
+1
Tested on a VMware environment with VM and volume operations on NFS and
Datastore Cluster storage types and a few network operations.
Thanks,
Harikrishna
From: Rohit Yadav
Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2022 1:20 AM
To: dev
Cc: users
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache C
I had assumed this was a non-technical discussion/vote where the changes are
made in docs on suggested changes to how CloudStack is deployed and used with
CentOS7. I assumed this will follow as a doc PR to the QIG.
Changes to docs aren't normally considered technical as per our project bylaws
a
The few times I used CentOS, or when implementing KVM local storage
migration, I always had issues with "stock" CentOS qemu.
I am definitely +1.
On Tue, Mar 1, 2022, 22:01 Daniel Augusto Veronezi Salvador <
dvsalvador...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Rohit,
>
> As we are deciding a requirement for deployi
Rohit,
As we are deciding a requirement for deploying ACS + KVM + CentOS 7, I
see it as an important technical decision, that is why I started the
voting thread. The discussion was made via another thread[¹]; therefore,
this vote was created with the intention to summarize the discussion we
h
(phone issue sent draft accidentally)... where consensus is built without
opposition. Therefore this vote thread isn't necessary.
Refer to project bylaws https://cloudstack.apache.org/bylaws.html
Regards.
From: Daniel Augusto Veronezi Salvador
Sent: Tuesday, Mar
Daniel,
Non-technical discussions that don't affect source code or releases don't need
voting under cases where consensus is built iunless
From: Daniel Augusto Veronezi Salvador
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 5:08:55 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [
+1 (binding)
Regards.
From: Gabriel Br?scher
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 9:41:25 PM
To: dev
Cc: users
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.16.1.0 (RC2)
+1 on continuing with RC2 Vote.
On Tue, Mar 1, 2022, 17:03 Vladimir Petrov
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Voting
+1 on continuing with RC2 Vote.
On Tue, Mar 1, 2022, 17:03 Vladimir Petrov
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Voting +1
>
> I did a lot of upgrade tests with pre-RC, RC1 and RC2 versions, using
> different hypervisors and from different versions (4.11, 4.13, 4.15.2,
> 4.16.0). I also tested main workflows and
Hi all,
Voting +1
I did a lot of upgrade tests with pre-RC, RC1 and RC2 versions, using different
hypervisors and from different versions (4.11, 4.13, 4.15.2, 4.16.0). I also
tested main workflows and basic operations and haven't found a single issue.
Best wishes,
Vladi
Suresh Anaparti wrote
blueorangutan commented on pull request #264:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/pull/264#issuecomment-1055450017
Doc build preview: http://qa.cloudstack.cloud/docs/WIP-PROOFING/pr/264.
(SL-JID 203)
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To res
blueorangutan commented on pull request #264:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/pull/264#issuecomment-1055449204
@sureshanaparti a Jenkins job has been kicked to build the document. I'll
keep you posted as I make progress.
--
This is an automated message from the A
sureshanaparti commented on pull request #264:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/pull/264#issuecomment-1055448413
@blueorangutan docbuild
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL
sureshanaparti opened a new pull request #264:
URL: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/pull/264
4.16.1.0 release notes/docs updates
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go t
+1
Cheers,
Sven Vogel
Apache CloudStack PMC member
Am Dienstag, den 03/01/2022 um 12:44 schrieb Slavka Peleva:
Hi everyone,
+1. I'm using it in all my labs (installed from the official repo) and
didn't face any issues like the stock qemu-kvm. Also, a lot of our
customers are using qemu-kvm-
Hi everyone,
+1. I'm using it in all my labs (installed from the official repo) and
didn't face any issues like the stock qemu-kvm. Also, a lot of our
customers are using qemu-kvm-ev.
Best regards,
Slavka
On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 1:39 PM Daniel Augusto Veronezi Salvador <
dvsalvador...@gmail.com>
Hi, Andrija and Paul,
This is the vote thread, not the discussion one. The goal of this thread
is to account votes to verify the agreement of the community with the
proposed solution that we seem to have in the discussion thread. For
discussions, please refer to the discussion thread[¹].
The g
Agree with Rohit, and it's a very rare case.
@Gabriel, Do you agree to continue with 4.16.1.0 RC2?
Regards,
Suresh
On 01/03/22, 3:10 PM, "Andrija Panic" wrote:
That makes sense, Rohit, indeed. UUID is impossible to guess.
Gabriel, Suresh?
On Tue, 1 Mar 2022 at 09:31, Rohit
That makes sense, Rohit, indeed. UUID is impossible to guess.
Gabriel, Suresh?
On Tue, 1 Mar 2022 at 09:31, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> 2cents;
>
> I suppose it's up to the RM to triage and if necessary cut RC3, however,
> if a normal user account can't have the list of resources (uuid, in this
> case
Sounds good to me to move to qemu-kvm-ev, may be worth mentioning the ovirt
repo in our docs if it is more featureful and widely used/maintained.
Daniel, it wasn't my comment but Andrija's and it's the other way around, the
official qemu-kvm-ev releases have limitations/regressions. Quoting Andr
2cents;
I suppose it's up to the RM to triage and if necessary cut RC3, however, if a
normal user account can't have the list of resources (uuid, in this case
network's UUID) then it doesn't appear a critical issue to me for 99.99% cases.
Long term - it may be worth doing a broad search for all
21 matches
Mail list logo
