ilders [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 9:05 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
>
> On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Mathias Mullins
> wrote:
>
> > Technically I don't see any binding -1 vetoes being de
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 12:58:52PM +, Mathias Mullins wrote:
> Was trying to help a non-bias party. :-)
Yup, and we appreciate it Matt.
Ah, Thanks for clarifying Chip, wasn't super clear in the by-laws the way
they are written. So I wasn't sure how to write it.
I totally agree with you that all votes are important, the only reason I
focused on the PMC votes is because we seemed to be getting completely off
base about getting the r
.
-Original Message-
From: Marcus Sorensen [mailto:shadow...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 8:01 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
Sorry, I should have declared my vote as binding, I meant to.
That's great news
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Mathias Mullins
wrote:
> Technically I don't see any binding -1 vetoes being declared. Animesh is
> correct on this.
>
>
I don't have to write "Binding" next to my vote. Votes are technically
"binding" when the person voting is considered to have binding vote.
Also
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 5:12 PM, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
>
> On Sep 9, 2013, at 5:08 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi <
> animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >>
> >> On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Sebastien Goasguen
> >> wrote:
> >>> Maybe before we get to carried away talking about future rel
rote:
> >>>
> >>> >-1 from me as well.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >I know we're trying to hit timed releases, but I think it's very
> >>> >important to preserve key underlying functionality across releases.
+1(binding), tested on devcloud, and based on the QA's recently test result,
seems it's stabilized for a while now(QA team didn't "bother" me for a few
weeks:))
> -Original Message-
> From: Animesh Chaturvedi [mailto:animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2013 9:43
board. If people can pick these up and help to review
, fix and submit it would help everyone.
-Original Message-
From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 1:48 PM
To: dev
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
Why can'
do not upgrade until it has been
>> fixed).
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Chiradeep Vittal <
>> >>>> chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I know we're trying to hit timed releases, but I think it's very
>>>>> important to preserve key underlying functionality across releases. If a
>>>>> supported and documented feature is known to be br
ant to preserve key underlying functionality across releases. If a
>> >supported and documented feature is known to be broken, we need to
>> >address it...if we don't, it's going to cause lots of pain, and reflect
>> >badly on ACS as a project.
>> >
> >I know we're trying to hit timed releases, but I think it's very
>>> >important to preserve key underlying functionality across releases. If a
>>> >supported and documented feature is known to be broken, we need to
>>> >address it...if we don't, it's going t
> -Original Message-
> From: Animesh Chaturvedi [mailto:animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 2:04 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
>
>
>
> > -Original Messag
>>> >I know we're trying to hit timed releases, but I think it's very
>>>> >important to preserve key underlying functionality across releases. If a
>>>> >supported and documented feature is known to be broken, we need to
>>>> &g
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 9/9/13 7:42 AM, "Simon Weller" wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> -1 from me as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know we're trying to hit tim
to preserve key underlying functionality across releases. If a
>> >supported and documented feature is known to be broken, we need to
>> >address it...if we don't, it's going to cause lots of pain, and reflect
>> >badly on ACS as a project.
>> >
>> &g
>>> chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I think that Animesh is trying to stress what is "key". If it hits
> >>>>> 1% of cloud operators is it key?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>&
gt; On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Chiradeep Vittal <
>>>>>> chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think that Animesh is trying to stress what is "key". If it hits
>>>>>>> 1% of cloud
> -Original Message-
> From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 1:46 PM
> To: dev
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
>
> I think we are hitting a well documented feature of open source here,
cloud operators is it key?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 9/9/13 7:42 AM, "Simon Weller" wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> -1 from me as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know we&#
feature is known to be broken, we need to
> >address it...if we don't, it's going to cause lots of pain, and reflect
> >badly on ACS as a project.
> >
> >- Original Message -----
> >
> >From: "Chip Childers"
> >To: dev@cloudstack.apa
> -Original Message-
> From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 11:50 AM
> To: dev
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
>
> Animesh,
>
> Without wanting to pass judgement on the qu
> -Original Message-
> From: Marcus Sorensen [mailto:shadow...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 11:10 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
>
> We just need to have basic automated testing of
: "Chip Childers"
>To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>Sent: Monday, September 9, 2013 9:24:23 AM
>Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
>
>On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 12:40:30AM -0600, Marcus Sorensen wrote:
>> -1 ... sorry guys, especially with Simon chim
day, September 09, 2013 11:10 AM
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
> >
> > We just need to have basic automated testing of every core supported
> > platform. With 4.1 we released a product that didn't
Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 8:31 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi
wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Marcus Sorensen [mailto:shadow...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 11:10 AM
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStac
g.
Draw the line somewhere.
--
Chiradeep
On 9/9/13 10:51 AM, "Animesh Chaturvedi"
wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
>> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 8:25 AM
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.or
> -Original Message-
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 8:25 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
>
> On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 10:42:48AM -0400, Simon
ng.
>>
>> Draw the line somewhere.
>> --
>> Chiradeep
>>
>>
>> On 9/9/13 10:51 AM, "Animesh Chaturvedi"
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >> -----Original Message-
>> >> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip
>
> On 9/9/13 10:51 AM, "Animesh Chaturvedi"
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> >> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 8:25 AM
> >> To: dev@cloudstack.ap
ders [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> > Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 8:25 AM
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 10:42:48AM -0400, Simon Weller wrote:
> > > -1
...@sungard.com]
> > > Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 8:25 AM
> > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 10:42:48AM -0400, Simon Weller wrote:
> > >
On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 10:42:48AM -0400, Simon Weller wrote:
> -1 from me as well.
>
>
> I know we're trying to hit timed releases, but I think it's very important to
> preserve key underlying functionality across releases. If a supported and
> documented feature is known to be broken, we nee
se lots of pain, and reflect badly on ACS as a project.
- Original Message -
From: "Chip Childers"
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Sent: Monday, September 9, 2013 9:24:23 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 12:40:30AM -0600
On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 12:40:30AM -0600, Marcus Sorensen wrote:
> -1 ... sorry guys, especially with Simon chiming in.
>
> I'd request f2c5b5fbfe45196dfad2821fca513ddd6efa25c9 be cherry-picked.
Agreed.
I'm -1, given simon's perspective as well. Since we have the fix, let's
get it into the rele
t;>>> -Original Message-
>>>>> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
>>>>> Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 10:21 AM
>>>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0
>>>
>>>
>>>> -Original Message-
>>>> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
>>>> Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 10:21 AM
>>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Clou
ent: Friday, September 06, 2013 10:21 AM
>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
>>>
>>> Animesh,
>>>
>>> I'd ask that this vote stay open until EOD Monday. I've tested t
It's fixed on 4.2-forward branch, I tested it on my local machine already.
> -Original Message-
> From: Simon Weller [mailto:swel...@ena.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 3:25 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourt
On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 08:18:35PM +, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> > Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 10:21 AM
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject
> to do.
> Is it possible, I write some code, then have you help to test? I almost
> finished the code.
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Marcus Sorensen [mailto:shadow...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 2:32 PM
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache
---
> > From: Marcus Sorensen [mailto:shadow...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 2:32 PM
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
> >
> > I don't use CLVM any more, and I have no idea how m
tested before midday Monday. I did
start building the first RC, but packaging was still broken...then I got
sidetracked.
- Original Message -
From: "Marcus Sorensen"
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Sent: Friday, September 6, 2013 5:08:53 PM
Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache CloudS
rensen [mailto:shadow...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 2:32 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
>
> I don't use CLVM any more, and I have no idea how many people do. I'm
> relatively certain that some
edi wrote:
> >
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> > > Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 10:21 AM
> > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (f
> -Original Message-
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 10:21 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
>
> On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 04:43:16AM +, Ani
On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 04:43:16AM +, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
>
>
> I've created a 4.2.0 release, with the following artifacts up for a
> vote:
>
> Git Branch and Commit SH:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.2
> Commit: e39a7d8e0d3f2fd3e32
+1 (binding)
The marvin integration tests were fixed by several folks this last
month. And the results of those tests shows good stability. Failures
in tests are known but overall a good indicator for release. Some failures were
because of capacity constraints on the test infrastructure. All tests
+1
Testing done in OEL64*/KVM environment using a small foot print OEL64 VM
image with userdata and reporting to central server to verify that VMs
comes up properly. KVM hosts are 32 core / 256 GByte RAM / 1GBit /
localstorage on fast RAID (8x600G;RAID5). Manager runs in VirtualBox
with local
+1
Tested basic VM operations with Xenserver and KVM and nfs as primary storage
with Advance Zone.
Thanks
Rajesh Battala
-Original Message-
From: Animesh Chaturvedi [mailto:animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 4, 2013 10:13 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject
+1.
Tested all steps in the release procedure.
On 9/3/13 9:43 PM, "Animesh Chaturvedi"
wrote:
>
>
>I've created a 4.2.0 release, with the following artifacts up for a
>vote:
>
>Git Branch and Commit SH:
>https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs
>/heads/4.2
>Com
> -Original Message-
> From: Animesh Chaturvedi [mailto:animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 3:29 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (third round)
>
>
>
> > -Original Message
g>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (third round)
Does this mean that the current RC doesn't work with XCP?
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 06:49:19PM +, Chiradeep Vittal wrote:
> DevCloud2 works with fix 1a333f36 for CLOUDSTACK-4559
>
> On 8/29/13 10:08 AM, "Chirade
Verified third round RC with XS 6.0.2, basic zone (raised a couple of
minor UI defects)
On 8/29/13 11:49 AM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
wrote:
>DevCloud2 works with fix 1a333f36 for CLOUDSTACK-4559
>
>On 8/29/13 10:08 AM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>wrote:
>
>>I have not had success on DevCloud2, there seems t
ailto:chip.child...@sungard.com>
>Sent: ?8/?30/?2013 6:57 AM
>To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org>
>Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (third round)
>
>Does this mean that the current RC doesn't work with XCP?
>
>
>On Thu, A
Does this mean that the current RC doesn't work with XCP?
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 06:49:19PM +, Chiradeep Vittal wrote:
> DevCloud2 works with fix 1a333f36 for CLOUDSTACK-4559
>
> On 8/29/13 10:08 AM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
> wrote:
>
> >I have not had success on DevCloud2, there seems to be a
two messages yesterday from people with
> > critical
> > > fixes requesting to be cherry picked to 4.2, so I assumed that would
> > happen.
> > >
> > > Thanks for the update!
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi &l
gt; wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-
> > > > From: Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 10:40 PM
> > > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>
t; animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 10:40 PM
> > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> -Original Message-
> > From: Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 10:40 PM
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (third round)
> >
> > Hi Animesh,
> >
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 10:40 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (third round)
>
> Hi Animesh,
>
> It looks like we
DevCloud2 works with fix 1a333f36 for CLOUDSTACK-4559
On 8/29/13 10:08 AM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
wrote:
>I have not had success on DevCloud2, there seems to be an issue with a XCP
>plugin. I don't think it warrants a -1 yet, I am scrambling to find a
>regular XS host to test on.
>
>
>On 8/28/13 6:5
I have not had success on DevCloud2, there seems to be an issue with a XCP
plugin. I don't think it warrants a -1 yet, I am scrambling to find a
regular XS host to test on.
On 8/28/13 6:57 AM, "Animesh Chaturvedi"
wrote:
>
>Fixed the subject line as third round
>-
>Hi All,
>
Hi Animesh,
It looks like we have a couple Critical bug fixes newly checked in to
4.2-forward.
Sounds like we'll be spinning up a new RC then?
Just to confirm, you will pick up my fix in that new RC, as well?
Thanks!
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Marcus Sorensen wrote:
> These are just so
These are just some notes that might be useful things to point out in
the release, as they tripped me up, and I'm sure others will be as
well:
1. vnc password, still looking for docs on how this works. I found the
bug report and the patch, but I had to resort to looking at the
StartCommand log on
Thanks, David
My storage plug-in works for XenServer in 4.2, but - without this little
checkin to 4.2-forward - it cannot support VMware, so I was interested in
seeing how far out that would be if we don't re-spin 4.2.
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 3:43 PM, David Nalley wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 5:13 PM, Mike Tutkowski
wrote:
>
> Thanks
>
> By the way, do you know of hand when 4.2.1 is scheduled for release?
>
Typically it takes a couple of months after the feature release,
though it might be preempted by a security issue which forces a faster
update.
--David
subsequent maintenance release.
>
> Thanks
> Animesh
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 1:12 PM
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Clou
k.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (third round)
>
> I hate to do this, but I just found a critical, but simple-to-fix issue.
>
> It is low risk and only impacts the SolidFire plug-in.
>
> Sorry for the late notice here, but I just finished all of my regres
al Message-
> > From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 8:21 PM
> > To: dev
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (third round)
> >
> > I don't want to judge on this, as I know you have been askin
een requesting for Release Notes volunteersNobody've responded so
> far...
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 8:21 PM
> To: dev
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.
I have been requesting for Release Notes volunteersNobody've responded so
far...
-Original Message-
From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 8:21 PM
To: dev
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (third round)
I don'
I don't want to judge on this, as I know you have been asking for
community support but how do we go about creating release notes as no
one seems to have time for those?
Would a list of child pages to
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/4.2+Design+Documents
do? This is rhetorica
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 01:57:51PM +, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
> I've created a 4.2.0 release, with the following artifacts up for a
> vote:
>
> Git Branch and Commit SH:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.2
> Commit: 75dff7cc78eafac9a7723f3e9
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 01:59:10PM +, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
> [Animesh>] Yes it is, I sent the same email with the correct subject title.
> Sorry for creating confusion.
Not a problem! I just wanted to be sure my time was spent on the right
thing...
> -Original Message-
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 6:55 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (second round)
>
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 05:58:08AM +, Ani
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 05:58:08AM +, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> I've created a 4.2.0 release, with the following artifacts up for a
> vote:
>
> Git Branch and Commit SH:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.2
> Commit: 75dff7
> -Original Message-
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 10:12 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (second round)
>
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 05:46:24PM +0200, Wid
t; > it fixes DHCP functionality which was broken by a recent commit in
> core
> > > > code
> > > > .
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Dave.
> > > > 2013年8月27日火曜日 Animesh Chaturvedi animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com:
> > > >
; below yours:
> > > >
> > > > commit ae68c841f668768118bbff07f07060416fb16d48
> > > > Author: Jessica Wang > > > jessicaw...@apache.org >>
> > > > Date: Mon Aug 26 14:24:22 2013 -0700
> > > >
> > > > CLOUDSTACK-4089: UI
> -Original Message-
> From: Prasanna Santhanam [mailto:t...@apache.org]
> Sent: Monday, August 26, 2013 11:56 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (second round)
>
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 06:36:53AM +, Ani
> -Original Message-
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 10:12 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (second round)
>
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 05:46:24PM +0200, Wid
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 05:46:24PM +0200, Wido den Hollander wrote:
>
>
> On 08/27/2013 05:20 PM, Chip Childers wrote:
> >On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 02:29:51PM +, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
> >>
> >>
> Git Branch and Commit SH:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=
Wido, with all due respect, the data shows that the RC is ready.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Dashboard.jspa?selectPageId=12320942
There's 2 blockers, both of which existed prior to 4.2
QA is merely going to repeat the test cases they already executed?
Are we hoping they are going to fin
On 08/27/2013 05:20 PM, Chip Childers wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 02:29:51PM +, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
Git Branch and Commit SH:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=
refs/heads/4.2
Commit: 9103984d349927a87b0683048dda2d8004e6854f
I notice Ediso
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 02:29:51PM +, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
>
>
> > > Git Branch and Commit SH:
> > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=
> > > refs/heads/4.2
> > > Commit: 9103984d349927a87b0683048dda2d8004e6854f
> > >
> >
> > I notice Edison's fix is
> > Git Branch and Commit SH:
> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=
> > refs/heads/4.2
> > Commit: 9103984d349927a87b0683048dda2d8004e6854f
> >
>
> I notice Edison's fix is missing although it is on 4.2. Is this
> intended?
>
[Animesh>] Edison checked it in
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 06:36:53AM +, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> I've created a 4.2.0 release, with the following artifacts up for a
> vote:
>
> Git Branch and Commit SH:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.2
> Commit: 9103984d3
trix.com]
> > Sent: Monday, August 26, 2013 4:05 PM
> > To: Mike Tutkowski; Brian Federle
> > Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Jessica Wang
> > Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.2.0
> >
> > Ok so git experts on the list I should skip Mike's merge com
list I should skip Mike's merge commit and
> > > instead pick the one from Jessica?
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Animesh
> > >
> > > From: Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
> ]
> > > Sent: Monday, August 26, 2013
; >
> > Thanks
> > Animesh
> >
> > From: Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com]
> > Sent: Monday, August 26, 2013 4:03 PM
> > To: Brian Federle
> > Cc: Animesh Chaturvedi; dev@cloudstack.apache.org ;
> Jessica
> > Wang
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE
o:dcah...@midokura.com]
> Sent: Monday, August 26, 2013 4:25 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Cc: Mike Tutkowski; Brian Federle; Jessica Wang
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.2.0
>
> Hi,
>
> I reported CLOUDSTACK-4466 4 days ago and submitted a patch. It
6, 2013 4:03 PM
> To: Brian Federle
> Cc: Animesh Chaturvedi; dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Jessica Wang
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.2.0
>
> Yeah, I agree. :) I think I merged instead of rebased.
>
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Brian Federle <mailto:bria
@solidfire.com ]
> Sent: Monday, August 26, 2013 4:03 PM
> To: Brian Federle
> Cc: Animesh Chaturvedi; dev@cloudstack.apache.org ; Jessica
> Wang
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.2.0
>
> Yeah, I agree. :) I think I merged instead of rebased.
>
> On Mon, Aug 2
nal Message-
> From: Animesh Chaturvedi [mailto:animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Monday, August 26, 2013 4:05 PM
> To: Mike Tutkowski; Brian Federle
> Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Jessica Wang
> Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.2.0
>
> Ok so git experts o
ssica Wang
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.2.0
Yeah, I agree. :) I think I merged instead of rebased.
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Brian Federle
mailto:brian.fede...@citrix.com>> wrote:
Probably something just got messed up during the rebase, I see this commit
below you
> *Sent:* Monday, August 26, 2013 3:56 PM
> *To:* Mike Tutkowski
> *Cc:* dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Brian Federle; Jessica Wang
> *Subject:* RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.2.0
>
> ** **
>
> Mike the commit message shows it is a merge “Merge remote-tracking branch
>
013 3:56 PM
To: Mike Tutkowski
Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Brian Federle; Jessica Wang
Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.2.0
Mike the commit message shows it is a merge "Merge remote-tracking branch
'upstream/4.2-forward' into 4.2-forward"
Adding Brian and Jess
fire.com]
>> *Sent:* Monday, August 26, 2013 3:45 PM
>> *To:* Animesh Chaturvedi
>> *Cc:* dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Brian Federle
>>
>> *Subject:* Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.2.0
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> I don't understand how those got in the
1 - 100 of 136 matches
Mail list logo
