Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/606
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is
Github user DaanHoogland commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/606#issuecomment-124544128
LGTM
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
Github user karuturi commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/606#issuecomment-124334323
Thanks for the update. changes looks good :+1:
Some unit/marvin tests would be good
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have
Github user wido commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/606#issuecomment-124249061
@karuturi Fixed that. See the new commit
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project
Github user karuturi commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/606#issuecomment-123585585
Yes. Copy paste error :)
-Original Message-
From: "Wido den Hollander"
Sent: â21-â07-â2015 21:19
To: "apache/cloudstack"
Cc:
Github user karuturi commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/606#issuecomment-123554934
yes. copy paste error :)
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not ha
Github user wido commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/606#issuecomment-123381112
Shouldn't we then pass "params" to the configure method? That seems to be
missing in your example.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email an
Github user karuturi commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/606#issuecomment-123278333
while I agree with the code change based on the current implementations of
getVirtualSize, should we just pass the storage layer in the params so that any
new imple
GitHub user wido opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/606
CLOUDSTACK-8648: Do not configure the ImageFormat Processor when fetcâ¦
â¦hing filesize
It will throw an exception and that's needed.
Also, make the log show about which file we
