Re: Unable to upload SSL certificate

Hi, The commit below actually ensures parity between API and UI calls, in absence of which API calls will fail. Additionally, without it POST calls will fail. Please do send a note in case reverting part of the commit. I believe Saksham has removed the double decoding for the API, which seems the

Re: Review Request 22452: CLOUDSTACK-6872 : removed the redundant connectToRemote method

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22452/ --- (Updated June 11, 2014, 7:31 a.m.) Review request for cloudstack, Devdeep Singh

irc meeting on rvr4vpc

H, We had a little meeting on the state of this feature and the way to go. I have no karma for ASFBot meetings so here is my excerpt from the transcript: Attendance: K3KH Karl Harris Yasker Sheng Yang Spark404 Hugo Trippaers echaz Eric Chazas LeoSimons Leo Simons dahn Daan Hoogland others where

Re: unused private methods in VirtualMachinManagerImpl

is there one availible or are we implementing @usedPrivate ? On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 2:54 AM, Mike Tutkowski wrote: > Good idea > > On Tuesday, June 10, 2014, Kelven Yang wrote: > >> Maybe utilizing special java annotation would get developer heads-up? >> Content in comments text is easily skipp

Re: [ACS4.4]Cherry-pick 09a357fb90b48ed6e2725ea60e632a2ad5529f79

On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Min Chen wrote: > 09a357fb90b48ed6e2725ea60e632a2ad5529f79 is in -- Daan

Re: Anybody addressing this bug ? Overlaping IP subnets across different vlans

It was not there pre 4.3, and it's just causing me problems, I had to manually add database entries to vlan and user_ip_address tables, not very convinient... Thanks, Andrija On 11 June 2014 02:45, Chiradeep Vittal wrote: > Not sure what this has to do with Portable IP. But I agree that the che

Re: [PROPOSAL] Collect and provide generic key/value pairs to storage plug-ins

On 06/11/2014 12:26 AM, Mike Tutkowski wrote: Hi, Please feel free to review the following proposal for 4.5: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=42566111 Is this what we discussed at CCC13 in Amsterdam? Seems like it! I'm in favor, since this could add a lot of

Review Request 22454: Fixed few coverity reported issues

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22454/ --- Review request for cloudstack, daan Hoogland, Koushik Das, and Santhosh Edukulla

Re: Anybody addressing this bug ? Overlaping IP subnets across different vlans

This is not related to portable IP. This enforcement was added as part of commit 657d9e4789d73c7c8ed460e59f088b8cb9aa7697. Anothony might have context for this check. On 11/06/14 2:18 PM, "Andrija Panic" wrote: >It was not there pre 4.3, and it's just causing me problems, I had to >manually add

Re: [DISCUSS] Introducing Gerrit for quality? was: [PROPOSAL] Using continuous integration to maintain our code quality...

Sheng, In the end we both want the same thing, which is a higher quality codebase. However i find the technology first approach the wrong approach in this case. Of course supporting tools are needed to make the process more efficient. My main worry here is that the “experts” are not reviewing c

RE: [DISCUSS] Introducing Gerrit for quality? was: [PROPOSAL] Using continuous integration to maintain our code quality...

I think I agree with both of you! In the end, it's a social problem, of actually getting round to doing the reviews: but better tools can help to encourage that. For example, on github, the code review is integrated into the source control: every change is a pull request, and someone has to pre

Re: Review Request 22232: Fix for test_01_create_volume to use the correct volume name for KVM

> On June 10, 2014, 10:21 a.m., SrikanteswaraRao Talluri wrote: > > for future review requests, please create a bug in issues.apache.org and > > add it to the review request. master cdfa2650602fd03df266b3edb5591e5d96eb248b 4.4-forward 280d167316d92a8d24d0917f8945b408b87677a8 - SrikanteswaraRa

Review Request 22355: Fixed vm ha cases failing in master

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22355/ --- Review request for cloudstack and SrikanteswaraRao Talluri. Repository: cloudst

Re: Review Request 22355: Fixed vm ha cases failing in master

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22355/ --- (Updated June 11, 2014, 10:57 a.m.) Review request for cloudstack and Srikantes

Review Request 22456: CLOUDSTACK-6869: Public key content is overridden by template's meta data when you create a instance

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22456/ --- Review request for cloudstack and Kishan Kavala. Bugs: CLOUDSTACK-6869 http

Re: Review Request 22355: Fixed vm ha cases failing in master

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22355/#review45359 --- Ship it! master 31d870933dcc39a5886ea0f6c93b9718c33ac9aa - Srikant

Re: Review Request 22356: Fixed few coverity issues reported

> On June 10, 2014, 12:20 p.m., daan Hoogland wrote: > > engine/schema/src/com/cloud/upgrade/DatabaseIntegrityChecker.java, line 136 > > > > > > a commit in a finally when try-with-resource used seems not what you > >

Re: Review Request 22456: CLOUDSTACK-6869: Public key content is overridden by template's meta data when you create a instance

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22456/#review45363 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Kishan Kavala On June 11, 2014, 4:35 p.m., H

Re: Review Request 22456: CLOUDSTACK-6869: Public key content is overridden by template's meta data when you create a instance

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22456/#review45362 --- Commit aa75b4388554a502b1073dd78050cd4b364a803e in cloudstack's bran

Re: Review Request 22456: CLOUDSTACK-6869: Public key content is overridden by template's meta data when you create a instance

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22456/#review45364 --- Commit 522208dec2f81997c8b14d820c4f3f1be958ee44 in cloudstack's bran

Re: [DISCUSS] Introducing Gerrit for quality? was: [PROPOSAL] Using continuous integration to maintain our code quality...

Stephen, github would be nice if it was running under the apache umbrella. We still need to download a patch and apply and push it to wip... But most importantly and as you pointed out, we still need to look at the code before pushing anything of any color. On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 12:04 PM, Steph

RE: KVM + LXC on the same host

KVM system vms on the same host as LXC containers is already supported. Below proposal was to support userVms in a similar way. > -Original Message- > From: Chiradeep Vittal [mailto:chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com] > Sent: Wednesday, 11 June 2014 5:57 AM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subje

Re: Review Request 22356: Fixed few coverity issues reported

> On June 10, 2014, 12:20 p.m., daan Hoogland wrote: > > engine/schema/src/com/cloud/upgrade/DatabaseIntegrityChecker.java, line 136 > > > > > > a commit in a finally when try-with-resource used seems not what you > >

CLOUDSTACK-6825 changed to critical

LS, I have changed a issue marked blocker to critical. It had no developer assigned. Until it has backing of a committed developer I can not let the release be stopped by such an issue. -- Daan

CLOUDSTACK-6842 blocker to critical

Another issue entered at the 4th that had no backing of a dev. I changed the prio to critical. Until it is discussed on this list and developers agree that it is a blocker, it is not. -- Daan

Re: Review Request 22356: Fixed few coverity issues reported

> On June 10, 2014, 12:20 p.m., daan Hoogland wrote: > > engine/schema/src/com/cloud/upgrade/DatabaseIntegrityChecker.java, line 136 > > > > > > a commit in a finally when try-with-resource used seems not what you > >

Re: Review Request 22356: Fixed few coverity issues reported

> On June 10, 2014, 12:20 p.m., daan Hoogland wrote: > > engine/schema/src/com/cloud/upgrade/DatabaseIntegrityChecker.java, line 136 > > > > > > a commit in a finally when try-with-resource used seems not what you > >

[ACS-4.4] Cherry-pick request

Hi Daan, Can you please cherry-pick the following commit to 4.4 branch Commit aa75b4388554a502b1073dd78050cd4b364a803e in cloudstack's branch refs/heads/4.4-forward from Harikrishna Patnala [ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;h=aa75b43 ] CLOUDSTACK-6869: SSH Public key co

RE: CLOUDSTACK-6825 changed to critical

Template from snapshot is basic functionality, I think we should not reduce priority. Someone with dev background, possible to help on this. Regards, Rayees -Original Message- From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2014 5:10 AM To: dev Subject

Re: [DISCUSS] continuous integration for plugins requiring proprietary / hardware infra

On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 8:32 PM, Chiradeep Vittal wrote: > Hi, > > Since the Nuage VSP and Brocade plugins have been proposed recently, I was > wondering what is the mechanism to ensure that CI will test their plugins? > > Thanks There is none at the moment. What would you like to propose?

Re: Review Request 22456: CLOUDSTACK-6869: Public key content is overridden by template's meta data when you create a instance

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22456/#review45379 --- Commit 0667f678b81eb45e7b64cb22bee37f16882250e5 in cloudstack's bran

Re: [ACS-4.4] Cherry-pick request

On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Harikrishna Patnala wrote: > aa75b4388554a502b1073dd78050cd4b364a803e is in -- Daan

Re: [jira] [Commented] (CLOUDSTACK-6825) [Automation] Create template from snapshot fails with NPE in KVM

No blockers if no work is done on them. If it is a blocker it is important enough so it would be easy to find developers willing to work on it. An automation test failure might be due to the test in which case it is not a blocker at all. Discuss this on the dev list to find support for the bocker s

Re: feature : changing volume properties dynamically in 4.5

yes it sounds good, thanks for the proposal mike, yeah right now i have implemented prototype of my proposal, since its not generic we shall implement your proposal for 4.5. on the other hand, for 4.5 i'm supporting nfs protocol and resize feature for managed storage in xenserver, now trying to im

Re: [PROPOSAL] Collect and provide generic key/value pairs to storage plug-ins

Yep :) This is what we talked about at CCCEU13. On Wednesday, June 11, 2014, Wido den Hollander wrote: > On 06/11/2014 12:26 AM, Mike Tutkowski wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Please feel free to review the following proposal for 4.5: >> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=

[DISCUSS] Release 4.4

Hey all, I’m getting somewhat concerned about the 4.4 release. We don’t seems to be able to get the 4.4 branch in shape for a release candidate and meanwhile master is diverging further and further. We also know that once we hit the RC phase we will probably need a sizable number of iterations

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 11:30 AM, Hugo Trippaers wrote: > Hey all, > > I’m getting somewhat concerned about the 4.4 release. We don’t seems to be > able to get the 4.4 branch in shape for a release candidate and meanwhile > master is diverging further and further. We also know that once we hit t

Code Documentation

Hi All, Many of code areas under CS, currently don't have enough documentation i believe, we have few one liner comments at places. But, largely, was missing at various code areas. We in one of our earlier project, used to enforce strictly a template for comments\documentation for every new f

Re: unused private methods in VirtualMachinManagerImpl

I am not aware of any existing annotation for that purpose (not that that means it doesn't necessary exist). Kelven - Do you know of one? If not, would you be willing to create one? Thanks! On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 2:06 AM, Daan Hoogland wrote: > is there one availible or are we implementing @

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

Yeah, I am concerned about 4.4 getting farther behind schedule, as well, but I agree with David that we should not cancel it. I know it might be a pain, but I wonder if the RM would be willing to "nag" people every few days (just an e-mail to dev@) about the current list of blockers and their prog

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 5:30 PM, Hugo Trippaers wrote: > Hey all, > > I’m getting somewhat concerned about the 4.4 release. We don’t seems to be > able to get the 4.4 branch in shape for a release candidate and meanwhile > master is diverging further and further. We also know that once we hit the

Re: unused private methods in VirtualMachinManagerImpl

I guess we can create one. Currently available annotations that are to be applied to java code are as following * @Override * @Deprecated * @SuppressWarnings * @SafeVarargs(since Java 7) * @FunctionalInterface(since Java 8) Calling functions through reflection is not a common way for static typi

Re: unused private methods in VirtualMachinManagerImpl

Yeah, and when a tool like Eclipse says a private variable is not in use, I can easily see someone removing it. So, does that mean you will create such an annotation, Kelven? :) On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 10:52 AM, Kelven Yang wrote: > I guess we can create one. Currently available annotations th

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

On 6/11/14, 9:36 AM, "Mike Tutkowski" wrote: >Yeah, I am concerned about 4.4 getting farther behind schedule, as well, >but I agree with David that we should not cancel it. > >I know it might be a pain, but I wonder if the RM would be willing to >"nag" >people every few days (just an e-mail to de

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

Is there a list of issues, blockers, or todo items to be done in order to have 4.4 out ? The only things I saw is the list of blocker currently having 4 blocker ( https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-6602?filter=12327112) Does this mean that even if all blockers are fixed getting the

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

Good point - what is the release criteria? Is it just no blockers or is it no blockers and no criticals? Triaging the bugs is a good idea, too. We should make sure they still are what we have them listed as. On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 11:23 AM, Alena Prokharchyk < alena.prokharc...@citrix.com> wrot

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

According to that list, we have four blockers remaining...all network oriented. Murali Reddy has two. All four have an owner and presumably progress is being made. I guess it would be a good idea if we triaged critical defects and determined once the blockers are done if any of those should be fi

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

Hi, AFAIK a couple of Automation blockers [1] [2], which had no owner assigned, were moved to critical. [1] CLOUDSTACK-6842 [2] CLOUDSTACK-6825 Thanks, Amogh On 6/11/14 10:33 AM, "Mike Tutkowski" wrote: >we have four blockers remaining...all network >oriented. > >Murali Reddy has two. All f

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

CLOUDSTACK-6825 happens while doing object access check in ParamProcessWorker. Min/Prachi, can you take a look to see if its related to RBAC feature? -Alena. On 6/11/14, 10:45 AM, "Amogh Vasekar" wrote: >Hi, > >AFAIK a couple of Automation blockers [1] [2], which had no owner >assigned, were m

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

Just need a way to get people to see branches through to release. Freeze master or something. Releases will go out the door faster if it has to be done. On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 11:58 AM, Alena Prokharchyk < alena.prokharc...@citrix.com> wrote: > CLOUDSTACK-6825 happens while doing object access

RE: Anybody addressing this bug ? Overlaping IP subnets across different vlans

You can add overlapping IP subnets across different vlans if all vlans belong to guest network. CS treats public network differently, CS doesn't want public subnet overlap with other guest network. If different vlans are routable, it is possible that a VM has the same ip as a system VM, public

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

But the blockers/criticals would keep coming unless its certified that the new features have been tested with some confidence and that the basic functionalities work. Thanks, -Nitin On 11/06/14 10:33 AM, "Mike Tutkowski" wrote: >According to that list, we have four blockers remaining...all netw

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

I have assigned CLOUDSTACK-6825 to me. But from the stack trace, it seems failing in doing check access on the snapshot owner that is not active anymore, feel like a racing condition happening on automation setup. Rayees, several points to clarify: 1. Is this still happening on recent automation ru

RE: NetworkOrchestrator selects 2 NetworkGurus at one time....

Thanks Chiradeep and Murali for the reply! I am thinking of explicitly telling ExternalNetworkGuru to skip design when Brocade plugin is designing the network. I don't want to disable ExternalNetworkGuru from default build when Brocade plugin is not present so won't exclude it from the spring c

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

Seems to me there are two issues that comes up frequently when snapshots on ACS+KVM are discussed on these lists; 1) There is an option to enable/disable snapshots on ACS with KVM hypervisor, default is not enabled. 2) The "qemu-img convert" on recent RHEL6 systems lacks support for the op

RE: [PROPOSAL] Brocade network plugin to orchestrate Brocade VDX Switches for CloudStack 4.5

Thanks Chiradeep! Please see my answers inlined. Thanks & Regards, Ritu S. -Original Message- From: Chiradeep Vittal [mailto:chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2014 5:12 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Cc: Prakash Kaligotla; Nagendra Jaladanki Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] B

Re: irc meeting on rvr4vpc

One note: In fact the split of MASTER is not a big issue, because that would only happen if network runs bad enough, which already cause packet loss. The problem is it should recover from that situation fast enough. Previously due to ARP ping from BACKUP router(which thought it would replace MAST

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

It is said by evil tongues in this mail thread that me, the RM does not nag enough about the 4.4 branch status and the bugs marked to apply to it. Worse; those evil tongues might just be right. In can hereby say without reservation and with full heart and soul that I will better my life in this per

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

If we confirm that its a race condition, then the bug should be punted to 4.5 On 6/11/14, 11:38 AM, "Min Chen" wrote: >I have assigned CLOUDSTACK-6825 to me. But from the stack trace, it seems >failing in doing check access on the snapshot owner that is not active >anymore, feel like a racing co

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 10:31 PM, Alena Prokharchyk wrote: > If we confirm that its a race condition, then the bug should be punted to > 4.5 or solve it? -- Daan

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

I guess its time to define what qualifies to be called a blocker bug. Is blocker something that: 1) happens on all the setups? 2) blocks core features from executing Because I think that the bug happening on KVM only (lets say the vms fail to start = core feature), can be considered as a blocker

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

I agree, but I wouldn't pin 'blocker' by a definition of the nature of the defect. A blocker is something that blocks the community at large from releasing. What you define here would be useful for more vague prio definitions like 'critical', though. Of course a major defect in any of the hyperviso

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

On 6/11/14, 1:45 PM, "Daan Hoogland" wrote: >I agree, but I wouldn't pin 'blocker' by a definition of the nature of >the defect. A blocker is something that blocks the community at large >from releasing. What you define here would be useful for more vague >prio definitions like 'critical', thou

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

I agree - at this stage in the release, each blocker that remains should be decided on a case-by-case basis if we still feel it is a blocker. On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Alena Prokharchyk < alena.prokharc...@citrix.com> wrote: > > > On 6/11/14, 1:45 PM, "Daan Hoogland" wrote: > > >I agree,

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

Well, I think we should always treat the status of blocker that way. Something is a blocker if we feel it blocks us from releasing. Not just in this stage but always. (I think I am repeating myself a tad) In fact I feel we must treat those 90 critical issues the same way and I dare not start to thi

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

Sounds reasonable That being the case, do we feel we can build a first RC once our remaining blockers are completed? On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 3:19 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote: > Well, I think we should always treat the status of blocker that way. > Something is a blocker if we feel it blocks us fro

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

Hey folks, On 6/11/14, 6:36 PM, "Mike Tutkowski" wrote: >Yeah, I am concerned about 4.4 getting farther behind schedule, as well, >but I agree with David that we should not cancel it. > >I know it might be a pain, but I wonder if the RM would be willing to >"nag" >people every few days (just an e

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

Thanks, Leo! On Wednesday, June 11, 2014, Leo Simons wrote: > Hey folks, > > On 6/11/14, 6:36 PM, "Mike Tutkowski" > wrote: > >Yeah, I am concerned about 4.4 getting farther behind schedule, as well, > >but I agree with David that we should not cancel it. > > > >I know it might be a pain, but I

Re: [PROPOSAL] Brocade network plugin to orchestrate Brocade VDX Switches for CloudStack 4.5

Ritu, Answering your DB upgrade question. Schema upgrade changes should be put to 44-45 sql upgrade script, not to create-schema.sql. All previous releases get upgraded to 4.4 before being upgraded to 45. -Alena. On 6/11/14, 11:56 AM, "Ritu Sabharwal" wrote: >Thanks Chiradeep! Please see my

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

Just looked at automation setup with Rayees, CLOUDSTACK-6825 is not really an issue of createTemplateFromSnapshot, the real issue is that the snapshot passed to createTemplate command has its owner removed in DB, thus causing checkAccess failure. As for why the snapshot is still not removed when th

RE: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

Yes we cannot cancel the release. IMHO we started the 4.4-forward branch way early. I had created the forward branch for 4.2 and 4.3 only after first RC because up until RC we have always seen a lot of code churn and I did not think RM can scale with all the cherry-picks given that RM has to foc

[ACS-4.4] Cherry-pick 8a9092c3cd4e3c034f9f4d0a7491875dc080e9dc

Daan – Can you please cherry-pick 8a9092c3cd4e3c034f9f4d0a7491875dc080e9dc into 4.4 ? This is for CLOUDSTACK-6895 Thanks, -Nitin

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

I any case, even the new bug that Rayees will file, is not a blocker and shouldn¹t hold cutting the RC. -alena. On 6/11/14, 3:27 PM, "Min Chen" wrote: >Just looked at automation setup with Rayees, CLOUDSTACK-6825 is not really >an issue of createTemplateFromSnapshot, the real issue is that the

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

Daan created jira public filters so they can be followed for the release-notes: Blockers: https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12327112 Criticals: https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12327119 Pierre-Luc Dion Architecte de Solution Cloud | Cloud Solutions Architect 855-OK-CLOUD

[ACS44] cherry pick CLOUDSTACK-6602 ([UI] createNetworkACL API action param value passed incorrectly)

Daan, Could you please cherry-pick following commit from 4.4-forward to 4.4 branch? Commit hash:95b7330d5696aa150f1845b76c6021885c919aea CLOUDSTACK-6602: [UI] createNetworkACL API action param value passed incorrectly Thank you. Jessica

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 4.4

Hugo, I would be -1 on the idea of combining 4.4 and 4.5. If we can’t get the change set for 4.4 stabilized then what makes us think we would be successful expanding it? We would be deferring the 4.4 risks to the 4.5 release and increasing its overall scope. For 4.2, we push out the freeze d

[ACS44] Cherry pick request

Hi Daan, Request you to cherry-pick the following commits to 4.4: c5ee5ad5c828d9f0b128e3d7280a30dcf717e045 - CLOUDSTACK-6864 5bcd017de6f421a6125406120b39fb8602276dc7 -CLOUDSTACK-6654 f14f36170e94c0184ade28a50226b17d25ecf57c-CLOUDSTACK-6812 Thanks, Saksham

Resize volume API without service offering failing in 4.4

Hi, I am trying to resize data volume in KVM and Xen, created new data volume with 5 GB and trying to resize to 10 GB. Followed 4.4 API doc , in this service offering id is not a required field; I am expecting volume should be resized even if we are not passing service offering id, used below

Re: Review Request 22454: Fixed few coverity reported issues

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22454/#review45466 --- server/src/com/cloud/configuration/ConfigurationManagerImpl.java

Re: Resize volume API without service offering failing in 4.4

Service offering is required if current offering is not a 'custom' sized offering. That is, if the volume is a locked into a fixed size because of the current service offering, the offering needs to be changed to a custom, or to a service offering of the desired size. On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 11:3

Re: Review Request 21375: CLOUDSTACK-6654: Configkey parameters are not validated

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/21375/#review45471 --- Commit 41030e4e3e39de694837d1a6dc2f4905da228d98 in cloudstack's bran

Re: feature : changing volume properties dynamically in 4.5

Sounds good - let me give some thought as to how we should break up the work. My GSoC student from Tunisia will be helping us, as well. On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 8:34 AM, Punith S wrote: > yes it sounds good, thanks for the proposal mike, > > yeah right now i have implemented prototype of my pro

Re: Review Request 22454: Fixed few coverity reported issues

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22454/#review45470 --- server/src/com/cloud/configuration/ConfigurationManagerImpl.java

Re: [DISCUSS] continuous integration for plugins requiring proprietary / hardware infra

Chiradeep, Perhaps we need to provide a little more background information. We are in process of drafting a request to ASF for lab/dev for Apache CloudStack Continuous Integration environment. In order for us to make sure that future releases of Apache CloudStack wont break functionality with

Re: Review Request 22258: Test cases for listAccounts, listFirewallRules and listVolumes.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22258/ --- (Updated June 12, 2014, 6:51 a.m.) Review request for cloudstack, Min Chen and

Re: Review Request 22258: [IAM functionality] Test cases for listAccounts, listFirewallRules and listVolumes

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22258/ --- (Updated June 12, 2014, 6:52 a.m.) Review request for cloudstack, Min Chen and

Re: Review Request 22453: [windows]Adding prot fields to the database creation wizard

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22453/ --- (Updated June 12, 2014, 6:58 a.m.) Review request for cloudstack, Abhinandan Pr