Midokura told us that it was a bad idea, probably wouldn't work and
> we
> > should just switch to openstack.
> >
> >
> > - Si
> >
> > ________________
> > From: Erik Weber
> > Sent: T
__
> From: Erik Weber
> Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 3:28 AM
> To: dev
> Subject: Re: midonet-client and Guava dependency conflict
>
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 7:45 PM, Rafael Weingärtner
> wrote:
> > I got a reply
: Erik Weber
> Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 3:28 AM
> To: dev
> Subject: Re: midonet-client and Guava dependency conflict
>
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 7:45 PM, Rafael Weingärtner
> wrote:
> > I got a reply from Midonet community; they said
just
switch to openstack.
- Si
From: Erik Weber
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 3:28 AM
To: dev
Subject: Re: midonet-client and Guava dependency conflict
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 7:45 PM, Rafael Weingärtner
wrote
lab back in early 2016 and Midokura
> told us that it was a bad idea, probably wouldn't work and we should just
> switch to openstack.
>
>
> - Si
>
>
> From: Erik Weber
> Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 3:28 AM
> To: dev
> Su
donet-client and Guava dependency conflict
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 7:45 PM, Rafael Weingärtner
wrote:
> I got a reply from Midonet community; they said that midonet-client was
> incorporated by midonet-cluster (
> https://github.com/midonet/midonet/tree/staging/v5.4/midonet-cluster).
[ht
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 7:45 PM, Rafael Weingärtner
wrote:
> I got a reply from Midonet community; they said that midonet-client was
> incorporated by midonet-cluster (
> https://github.com/midonet/midonet/tree/staging/v5.4/midonet-cluster).
>
>
> So, if anyone wants to invest energy on this, it m
; >> now considering it. If the fix is easy I'd say let it stay
> till
> > > the
> > > > > > >> next problem but it is ot the first time mido bugs us.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> O
...@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
> @shapeblue
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jeff Hair [mailto:j...@greenqloud.com]
> Sent: 10 March 2017 13:45
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re:
ault build/packaging. However, 'midonet' was never fully
> > > implemented
> > or
> > > completed and most definitely removed.
> > >
> > >
> > > Regards.
> > >
> > >
> > > From: S
e is some overriding of the sorted classpath
> > > >> loader.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > *Jeff Hair*
> > > >> > Technical Lead and Software Developer
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Tel: (+354) 415 0200
> > > >> >
/packaging in plugins/pom.xml?
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Several plugins in 'plugins/network-elements/' may be removed from
> > the
> > >> > > default build/packaging. However, 'midonet' was never fully
> > >> impl
gt;
> >> > On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 9:25 AM, Rohit Yadav <
> rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com
> >> >
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > +1 Retire unsupported plugins, with at least comment them from the
> >> > default
> >> > >
Retire unsupported plugins, with at least comment them from the
>> > default
>> > > build/packaging in plugins/pom.xml?
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Several plugins in 'plugins/network-elements/' may be removed from the
>> > > default buil
donet' was never fully implemented
> > or
> > > completed and most definitely removed.
> > >
> > >
> > > Regards.
> > >
> > >
> > > From: Simon Weller
> > > Sent: 09 March 2017
. As Jeff points out, the
> Midonet
> > plugin hasn't been actively supported for almost 5 years. At what point
> do
> > we consider retiring unsupported plugins?
> >
> >
> > - Si
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Jeff Hair
> > Sent: Thursday, March 9, 20
rom: Simon Weller
> Sent: 09 March 2017 21:37:08
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: midonet-client and Guava dependency conflict
>
> So this brings up a good discussion point. As Jeff points out, the Midonet
> plugin hasn't been actively supported for almos
and most definitely removed.
Regards.
From: Simon Weller
Sent: 09 March 2017 21:37:08
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: midonet-client and Guava dependency conflict
So this brings up a good discussion point. As Jeff points out, the Midonet
plugin hasn'
> > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 11:08 AM, Daan Hoogland <
> > > > > > daan.hoogl...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> I was
e
> > > > > > > people
> > > > > > > > using it, right?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 11:08 AM, Daan Hoogland <
> > > > > > daan.hoogl...@gmail.com>
> > > >
was about to reply along those lines. As you brought it up,
> we
> > > are
> > > > > > >> now considering it. If the fix is easy I'd say let it stay
> till
> > > the
> > > > > > >> next problem but it is ot the first time
t; > > >> I was about to reply along those lines. As you brought it up, we
> > are
> > > > > >> now considering it. If the fix is easy I'd say let it stay till
> > the
> > > > > >> next problem but it is ot the
easy I'd say let it stay till
> the
> > > > >> next problem but it is ot the first time mido bugs us.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 5:07 PM, Simon Weller
> > wrote:
> > > > >> > So this brings
bugs us.
> > > >>
> > > >> On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 5:07 PM, Simon Weller
> wrote:
> > > >> > So this brings up a good discussion point. As Jeff points out, the
> > > >> Midonet plugin hasn't been actively supported for al
up a good discussion point. As Jeff points out, the
> > >> Midonet plugin hasn't been actively supported for almost 5 years. At
> > what
> > >> point do we consider retiring unsupported plugins?
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > - Si
> > >> >
> > >> >
;t been actively supported for almost 5 years. At
> what
> >> point do we consider retiring unsupported plugins?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > - Si
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > From: Jeff Hair
> >> > Sent: Th
r almost 5 years. At what
>> point do we consider retiring unsupported plugins?
>> >
>> >
>> > - Si
>> >
>> >
>> > ____________
>> > From: Jeff Hair
>> > Sent: Thursday, March 9, 2017 9:43 AM
>> >
t do we consider retiring unsupported plugins?
> >
> >
> > - Si
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Jeff Hair
> > Sent: Thursday, March 9, 2017 9:43 AM
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: midonet-client an
M
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: midonet-client and Guava dependency conflict
>
> After doing some more digging, I have confirmed the following:
>
>- The midonet plugin is using the Maven Shade plugin to put a bunch of
>dependencies into itself.
>
: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: midonet-client and Guava dependency conflict
After doing some more digging, I have confirmed the following:
- The midonet plugin is using the Maven Shade plugin to put a bunch of
dependencies into itself.
- The plugin hosted in this repository was
After doing some more digging, I have confirmed the following:
- The midonet plugin is using the Maven Shade plugin to put a bunch of
dependencies into itself.
- The plugin hosted in this repository was last updated in 2013.
- Most importantly: removing all the guava stuff out of the m
Hi,
I'm deploying 4.9.2.0 (not the vanilla version, but rather an upgraded
version of our fork) on Tomcat 8. Management server startup fails with the
following error:
java.lang.IncompatibleClassChangeError: Found interface
com.google.common.base.Equivalence, but class was expected
I've traced th
32 matches
Mail list logo
