0:57:17 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: us...@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 LTS [RC2]
Hi All,
The vote for CloudStack 4.11.0.0 *passes* with 4 PMC + 2 non-PMC votes.
+1 (PMC / binding)
day, February 5, 2018 10:57:17 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Cc: us...@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 LTS [RC2]
>
> Hi All,
>
> The vote for CloudStack 4.11.0.0 *passes* with 4 PMC + 2 non-PMC votes.
>
>
ck.apache.org>
From: Rohit Yadav
Sent: Monday, February 5, 2018 10:57:17 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: us...@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 LTS [RC2]
Hi All,
The vote for CloudStack 4.11.0.0 *passes* with 4 PMC +
he.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 LTS [RC2]
Hi All,
The vote for CloudStack 4.11.0.0 *passes* with 4 PMC + 2 non-PMC votes.
+1 (PMC / binding)
2 person (Mike, Daan, Wido, Rohit)
+1 (non binding)
2 person (Lucian, Boris)
0
none
-1
none
Thanks to everyone participating.
I wi
Hi All,
The vote for CloudStack 4.11.0.0 *passes* with 4 PMC + 2 non-PMC votes.
+1 (PMC / binding)
2 person (Mike, Daan, Wido, Rohit)
+1 (non binding)
2 person (Lucian, Boris)
0
none
-1
none
Thanks to everyone participating.
I will now prepare the release announcement to go out after 48 hour
sts against Travis/simulator.
>
>
> - Rohit
>
> <https://cloudstack.apache.org>
>
>
>
>
> From: Wido den Hollander
> Sent: Saturday, February 3, 2018 6:49:47 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache
/simulator.
- Rohit
<https://cloudstack.apache.org>
From: Wido den Hollander
Sent: Saturday, February 3, 2018 6:49:47 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 LTS [RC2]
+1 (binding)
It took me a while to test ever
+1 (binding)
It took me a while to test everything with Basic Networking and Ubuntu
16.04, but my tests were all positive.
Wido
On 01/26/2018 01:19 PM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
Hi All,
I've created a 4.11.0.0 release (RC2), with the following artifacts up for
testing and a vote:
Git Branch and C
k.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 LTS [RC2]
>
> did package verification with all three sig files and including my own
> monkeying and Boris testing;
> +1 (binding)
>
>
> rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Co
Mike - is that a binding +1 vote?
Regards.
From: Daan Hoogland
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 2:52:41 PM
To: dev
Cc: us...@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 LTS [RC2]
did package verification with all three sig files and
did package verification with all three sig files and including my own
monkeying and Boris testing;
+1 (binding)
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 1:19 PM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I've created a 4.11.0.0 release (RC2), with the following artifacts up for
> testing and a vote:
>
> Git Branch and C
Hi,
I am +1 on RC2.
Here is the list of tests I ran for RC1:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2416#issuecomment-359220967
In that RC, I found one blocker, which has been fixed and included in RC2.
I went through the list of new commits for RC2 and I didn’t see anything in
them to con
; Cc: "users"
> Sent: Friday, 26 January, 2018 17:48:24
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 LTS [RC2]
> Hi all,
>
> I’ve done upgrade testing on the following platform matrix:
>
>
> OS and Hypervisor \ ACS Version 4.5 → 4.11 4.6 → 4.11 4.9
I won't be able to test sooner than Monday guys.
--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
Nux!
www.nux.ro
- Original Message -
> From: "Boris Stoyanov"
> To: "dev"
> Cc: "users"
> Sent: Friday, 26 January, 2018 17:48:24
&
Hi all,
I’ve done upgrade testing on the following platform matrix:
OS and Hypervisor \ ACS Version 4.5 → 4.11 4.6 → 4.11 4.9 → 4.11
M: CentOS6 H: CentOS 6 ✔
M: CentOS6 H: XS65sp1 ✔
M: CentOS6 H: VMware 5.5u3 ✔
M: CentOS7 H: CentOS 7 ✔
M: CentOS7 H: XS7
Hi All,
I've created a 4.11.0.0 release (RC2), with the following artifacts up for
testing and a vote:
Git Branch and Commit SH:
https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.11.0.0-RC20180126T1313
Commit: 5dada1f7ed5fb6a8ee261c763f744583e586f8bf
Source release (
January 24, 2018 2:08:40 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: users
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 (LTS)
I found and fixed an issue in cloudstack-agent logrotate.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-10255
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2429
IMHO it's f
he end of the week, it's likely we cut RC2 on
> Monday. Please continue testing RC1 in the meanwhile.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Rohit Yadav
>
>
> ____
> From: Nux!
> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2018 9:29:21 AM
> To: users
> Cc: dev
>
egards,
Rohit Yadav
From: Nux!
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2018 9:29:21 AM
To: users
Cc: dev
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 (LTS)
Paul,
Ok, let me play some more with those tunings params, see if I can find a
satisfactory combination and I'll withhold
- Original Message -
> From: "Paul Angus"
> To: "users"
> Cc: "dev"
> Sent: Tuesday, 23 January, 2018 19:55:01
> Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 (LTS)
> Hey Nux,
>
> There is quite a bit of tuning you can do, to speed or
-
From: Nux! [mailto:n...@li.nux.ro]
Sent: 23 January 2018 19:08
To: users
Cc: dev
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 (LTS)
Hi Paul,
To be honest I do not remember when I last saw this, as I have not been testing
ACS in 2017.
You'd kill a HV, the VMs would pop up on anot
ssage -
> From: "Paul Angus"
> To: "users" , "dev"
> Sent: Tuesday, 23 January, 2018 16:02:54
> Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 (LTS)
> Hi Nux,
>
> When have you seen the VMs on KVM behaving in the manner which you are
> expecting? I
[mailto:n...@li.nux.ro]
Sent: 23 January 2018 15:06
To: dev
Cc: users
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 (LTS)
Rohit,
I'll also have to insist with the VM HA issue.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-10246
Lucian
--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
;users"
> Sent: Tuesday, 23 January, 2018 14:28:34
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 (LTS)
> All,
>
>
> Given we've outstanding blockers and PRs in review/testing, I'll cut RC2 only
> after we manage to get them reviewed, tested and merged.
>
Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
From: Paul Angus
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2018 9:24:25 AM
To: us...@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: Rohit Yadav; dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Daan Hoogland
ary 22, 2018 9:24:25 AM
To: us...@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: Rohit Yadav; dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Daan Hoogland
Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 (LTS)
If I've understood the issue correctly, "not being able to log in if upgrading
from 4.5" is a blocker in my book. I
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
> @shapeblue
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Boris Stoyanov [mailto:boris.stoya...@shapeblue.com]
> Sent: 22 January 2018 07:31
> To: us...@cloudstack.apache.org
> Cc: Rohit Yadav ; dev@cloud
ent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
-Original Message-
From: Boris Stoyanov [mailto:boris.stoya...@shapeblue.com]
Sent: 22 January 2018 07:31
To: us...@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: Rohit Yadav ; dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Daan
Hoogland
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 (L
From: Tutkowski, Mike
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2018 4:29:21 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 (LTS)
Hi everyone,
I’ve completed running the automated (and, in some cases, manual) tests for
managed storage against RC1. With the exception of one critic
taIsEnabled=15 parameter?
>
>
>
>
> paul.an...@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
> @shapeblue
>
>
>
> From: Rohit Yadav
> Sent: 19 January 2018 09:27
> To: users ; dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Paul
> Ang
> From: Tutkowski, Mike
> Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 8:09:50 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 (LTS)
>
> Yes: I definitely won’t be able to complete my regression tests
within the
wrt to 4.11.0.0-rc1?
>
>
> - Rohit
>
> <https://cloudstack.apache.org>
>
>
>
>
> From: Tutkowski, Mike
> Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 8:09:50 PM
> To: dev@clou
...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
From: Rohit Yadav
Sent: 19 January 2018 09:27
To: users ; dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Paul Angus
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 (LTS)
Hi Bobby,
Agree, it's not user-fri
Wednesday, January 17, 2018 8:09:50 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 (LTS)
>
> Yes: I definitely won’t be able to complete my regression tests within the
> 72-hour window. For 4.12, I plan to automate the remainder of my tests, but
> I’m not
January 19, 2018 3:08:05 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: users; Paul Angus
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 (LTS)
Thanks Rohit,
That said I must agree it’s not a blocker but still it definitely should be
part of upgrade guide.
Bobby.
boris.stoya...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.c
: Friday, January 19, 2018 2:51:32 PM
To: users
Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 (LTS)
Hi Rohit,
That doesn’t sound much user friendly what do you think? Can we look for a way
to automate this dependency
ing to the release notes /cc @Paul
Angus<mailto:paul.an...@shapeblue.com>.
- Rohit
<https://cloudstack.apache.org>
From: Boris Stoyanov
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 2:51:32 PM
To: users
Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudst
_
> From: Boris Stoyanov
> Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 6:54:28 PM
> To: us...@cloudstack.apache.org
> Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 (LTS)
>
> I think I’ve hit a blocker when upgrading to 4.11
>
> Here’s the jira id: https://
Thanks Mike - do you see any blockers wrt to 4.11.0.0-rc1?
- Rohit
<https://cloudstack.apache.org>
From: Tutkowski, Mike
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 8:09:50 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 (LTS)
ck.apache.org>
From: Kris Sterckx
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 7:02:52 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 (LTS)
4.11.0 looks like an awesome reason ! Special thanks to Rohit !
I vote +0
- I vote for including CLOUDSTACK-9749 [1] into 4.11.0
Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 (LTS)
I think I’ve hit a blocker when upgrading to 4.11
Here’s the jira id: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-10236
I’ve upgraded from 4.5 to 4.11, then I’ve logged in with admin and got session
expired immediately.
Regards,
Boris Stoyanov
boris
All,
We're currently working on getting 4.11 stood up on hardware for testing. An
extension would certainly be helpful to us.
From: Nux!
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 1:07 PM
To: dev
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 (LTS)
The extensi
The extension is welcome!
--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
Nux!
www.nux.ro
- Original Message -
> From: "Boris Stoyanov"
> To: "dev"
> Sent: Wednesday, 17 January, 2018 18:24:20
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0
ke
mailto:mike.tutkow...@netapp.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 8:48:28 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 (LTS)
Or perhaps just the first RC should have a longer window?
On 1/17/18, 8:12 AM, &qu
48:28 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.11.0.0 (LTS)
Or perhaps just the first RC should have a longer window?
On 1/17/18, 8:12 AM, "Tutkowski, Mike" wrote:
If all of our testing were completely in an automated fashion, then I would
agree that the 72
Or perhaps just the first RC should have a longer window?
On 1/17/18, 8:12 AM, "Tutkowski, Mike" wrote:
If all of our testing were completely in an automated fashion, then I would
agree that the 72-hour window is sufficient. However, we don’t have that kind
of automated coverage and people
If all of our testing were completely in an automated fashion, then I would
agree that the 72-hour window is sufficient. However, we don’t have that kind
of automated coverage and people aren’t always able to immediately begin
testing things out like migrating from their version of CloudStack to
The 72 hours is to make sure all stakeholders had a chance to glance. Testing
is supposed to have happened before. We have a culture of testing only after
RC-cut which is part of the problem. The long duration of a single test run
takes, is another part. And finally, in this case there is the ne
On 01/17/2018 03:34 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote:
> People, People,
>
> a lot of us are busy with meltdown fixes and a full component test takes
> about the 72 hours that we have for our voting, I propose to extend the vote
> period until at least Monday.
+1
I wonder where this 72 hours windows com
On 01/17/2018 03:34 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote:
People, People,
a lot of us are busy with meltdown fixes and a full component test takes about
the 72 hours that we have for our voting, I propose to extend the vote period
until at least Monday.
Is that a good idea?
Yes please :-) I won't be a
Yes: I definitely won’t be able to complete my regression tests within the
72-hour window. For 4.12, I plan to automate the remainder of my tests, but I’m
not quite there with 4.11 (the vast majority of managed-storage tests are
automated, but not yet all).
On 1/17/18, 7:34 AM, "Daan Hoogland"
People, People,
a lot of us are busy with meltdown fixes and a full component test takes about
the 72 hours that we have for our voting, I propose to extend the vote period
until at least Monday.
Is that a good idea?
On 17/01/2018, 14:33, "Kris Sterckx" wrote:
4.11.0 looks like an awesom
4.11.0 looks like an awesome reason ! Special thanks to Rohit !
I vote +0
- I vote for including CLOUDSTACK-9749 [1] into 4.11.0 still
- And if that is accepted, I vote for including CLOUDSTACK-10233 [2] also
(Nuage-internal fix)
thanks
Kris
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDS
I think I’ve hit a blocker when upgrading to 4.11
Here’s the jira id: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-10236
I’ve upgraded from 4.5 to 4.11, then I’ve logged in with admin and got session
expired immediately.
Regards,
Boris Stoyanov
boris.stoya...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.
Hi everyone,
For the past couple days, I have been running the KVM managed-storage
regression-test suite against RC1.
With the exception of one issue (more on this below), all of these tests have
passed.
Tomorrow I plan to start in on the VMware-related managed-storage tests.
Once I’ve comple
Hi All,
I've created a 4.11.0.0 release, with the following artifacts up for
testing and a vote:
Git Branch and Commit SH:
https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.11.0.0-RC20180115T1603
Commit: 1b8a532ba52127f388847690df70e65c6b46f4d4
Source release (checks
56 matches
Mail list logo
