Github user nitt10prashant commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/638#issuecomment-126589627
can you post test results ?
---
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 do
Github user DaanHoogland commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/643#issuecomment-126599320
Thanks @kansal , please change the commit message to point to it. For
instance:
CLOUDSTACK-8692: resource leak found by the internal coverity instance at
Github user DaanHoogland commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/625#discussion_r35954149
--- Diff: setup/db/db/schema-452to460.sql ---
@@ -398,3 +398,5 @@ CREATE TABLE `cloud`.`external_bigswitch_bcf_devices` (
CONSTRAINT `fk_extern
Github user DaanHoogland commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/645#issuecomment-126605236
@pritisarap12 the pull request builders report conflicts. If you are sure
this is for the branch master, please have a look at those and rebase on top of
master
Github user DaanHoogland commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/631#issuecomment-126605717
All is green and as there is no other reviews and all tests are green, I am
going to say: LGTM. But please someone that understands the full ramifications
of th
Github user pritisarap12 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/638#issuecomment-126606147
Modified test to check for empty vmList and updating maxguestlimit
accordingly.
And the test result is-
Test hypervisor max limits effect ... === Te
Github user sanju1010 commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/638#discussion_r35954965
--- Diff: test/integration/testpaths/testpath_hypervisor_limit.py ---
@@ -0,0 +1,198 @@
+# Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
Github user sanju1010 commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/638#discussion_r35955013
--- Diff: test/integration/testpaths/testpath_hypervisor_limit.py ---
@@ -0,0 +1,198 @@
+# Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
Github user sanju1010 commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/631#discussion_r35955247
--- Diff: test/integration/testpaths/testpath_attach_disk_zwps.py ---
@@ -0,0 +1,209 @@
+# Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
Github user sanju1010 commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/631#discussion_r35955307
--- Diff: test/integration/testpaths/testpath_attach_disk_zwps.py ---
@@ -0,0 +1,209 @@
+# Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
Github user pritisarap12 commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/638#discussion_r35955311
--- Diff: test/integration/testpaths/testpath_hypervisor_limit.py ---
@@ -0,0 +1,198 @@
+# Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under
How your logic works if there are no system vms on a host (ssvm, cpvm and
VR)? I mean if the cluster has more than one host and system vms were
deployed on another host in the cluster?
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 2:01 PM, pritisarap12 wrote:
> Github user pritisarap12 commented on a diff in the pull
GitHub user shwetaag opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/646
test case automated for list template pagination
verify list template gives same result with page size=500&page=(1,2) and
page size=1000 when there are around 1000 templates .
Moved one tes
Hi Folks,
After updating to 4.5.1 and installing using the shapeblue SSVM templates:
http://packages.shapeblue.com/systemvmtemplate/4.5/new/
We are hitting an issue very similar to the below when trying to copy
templates between zones:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-1475
We ar
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-8696
This is a regression.
Regards,
Pavan
I am seeing the same issue on all the Automation BVT runs (across all
Hypervisors - KVM, XS and VMWare)- will publish automation results summary on
CWIKI and will post the same here.
integration.smoke.test_regions.TestRegions.test_createRegion is where it is
failing.
-Original Message--
Github user pritisarap12 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/638#issuecomment-126636676
Updated the testcase for:
-Count SSVM's on selected host
-Count VR on the host
-Count user VM's on the host
-Then update the m
Github user pritisarap12 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/638#issuecomment-126637367
Testcase Result-
Test hypervisor max limits effect ... === TestName:
test_check_hypervisor_max_limit_effect | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Ran 1
I feel this is a Blocker bug, failing across all Hypervisors, - not sure, the
reason for being it downgraded to a Critical.
Can someone else please try this out ?
-Original Message-
From: Raja Pullela [mailto:raja.pull...@citrix.com]
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2015 3:49 PM
To: dev@clouds
GitHub user wido opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/647
CLOUDSTACK-8640: Revert to AWS SDK 1.3.22
The newer SDKs API changed which causes our S3 Template Downloader to never
complete.
Although we should fix the Template Downloader we can revert
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Raja Pullela wrote:
> I feel this is a Blocker bug, failing across all Hypervisors, - not sure, the
> reason for being it downgraded to a Critical.
because it was not discussed on list before marking it as blocker. a
blocker is blocking a release which is not a
Github user nitt10prashant commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/638#issuecomment-126656909
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 featu
Ok, thanks for the clarification Daan...
Can someone, who is testing/trying out 4.6, test this functionality and post
their findings, please?
-Original Message-
From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2015 4:27 PM
To: dev
Subject: Re: Raised a blo
Dan,
Since it's failing across all hypervisors and failure in creating a Region
itself is a serious issue, I marked it as a blocker. Going forward will discuss
and then bump up the priority.
Can someone testing please comment their views on this.
-Original Message-
From: Raja Pullela [
GitHub user manuiiit opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/648
Only admin or owner of the template can change
its permissions using updateTemplatePermissions API
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://git
LGTM
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 4:42 PM, nitt10prashant wrote:
> Github user nitt10prashant commented on the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/638#issuecomment-126656909
>
> LGTM
>
>
>
> ---
> If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have y
Github user wido commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/625#issuecomment-126674015
I still don't know why travis fails. It fails on a storage part, but this
commit doesn't touch anything from the storage. So I can't see why.
---
If your project is se
Github user DaanHoogland commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/625#issuecomment-126677074
@wido not sure if these are related but please have a look at
https://builds.apache.org/job/cloudstack-pull-analysis/83/org.apache.cloudstack$cloud-core/testRepo
Github user wido commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/625#issuecomment-126684715
@DaanHoogland I see, but I'm not even getting near that code. So it's
unclear to me why this PR seems unstable.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to
Github user DaanHoogland commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/625#issuecomment-126685792
let's find out. it might reveal some totally unrelated problem due to
I never saw the serialization tests before AFAIR but will look at them now ;)
---
If
Github user DaanHoogland commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/625#discussion_r35971855
--- Diff: pom.xml ---
@@ -64,6 +64,7 @@
2.6.9
1.7.2
18.0
+2.3.1
--- End diff --
cs.gson.version is def
Hi,
Here is a wiki page created based on the automation runs I have locally -
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Automation+Results+-+Release+4.6.0
I will be adding/updating this wiki with the bugs created/found.
Please take a look and let me know if you have any questions or
Thanks Raja,
Can you explain the relation of lines 1 and 11? and 2 and 12? ...
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 3:17 PM, Raja Pullela wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here is a wiki page created based on the automation runs I have locally -
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Automation+Results+-+Re
Github user DaanHoogland commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/625#issuecomment-126691096
I confirmed the problem in the failing test is in the newer gson version.
Hope this works with the older gson. testing ... 1-2
---
If your project is set up fo
Github user wido commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/625#issuecomment-126695290
@DaanHoogland I need 2.3.1 for this patch to work. It builds with 2.3.1,
but not with 1.7.2
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have
Daan, line 1,2 are related to running the tests on a simulator build - this is
like Travis CI - tests. Since the tests are tagged we can run some of them on
simulator.
Also, 1 is Simulator with BasicZone BVT-tests in integration/smoke folder, 11
is Simulator BasicZone Regression- tests in int
Currently we are putting in effort to make sure no commit goes in directly
without a PR. Based on that, I think it makes sense to treat any reported
regression bug as a release blocker. If the bug is reported after release then
it is a different issue and needs to be fixed in the subsequent rele
Hi,
I am requesting to see if we can revisit the process for creating "blocker"
defects. I heard and do understand that someone can create a blocker defect
and may not actively involve in closing it out and it doesn't help the product.
I am not clear if we are doing this at and around RC time
+1
Categorizing an issue as blocker/showstopper should need some kind of
moderation. One possibility, voting and/or require approval from certain # of
PMCs. Alternately, this could also be left to the discretion of the RM.
Regards,
Somesh
-Original Message-
From: Raja Pullela [mailto:
-1 blocker means blocker and blocks a release. No one should be able
to block a release on their own. We should treat the critical category
as a staging area for those issues.
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 5:51 PM, Somesh Naidu wrote:
> +1
>
> Categorizing an issue as blocker/showstopper should need so
Thanks Raja, I hadn' noticed the smoke/integration difference. Thanks
for the data. Are you updating it automatically?
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 4:27 PM, Raja Pullela wrote:
> Daan, line 1,2 are related to running the tests on a simulator build - this
> is like Travis CI - tests. Since the tests
Koushik,
If an issue is serious it will be easy enough to convince the rest of
us that this is so.
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 4:48 PM, Koushik Das wrote:
> Currently we are putting in effort to make sure no commit goes in directly
> without a PR. Based on that, I think it makes sense to treat any
Daan,
While I have the same opinion as you that "No one should be able to block a
release on their own". I also agree that the issue should be posted to the ML
for discussion and it is the responsibility of the person who posted the defect
to do so.
I am more concerned with the process. My con
Somesh, please see my replies in line;
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 10:31 PM, Somesh Naidu wrote:
> Daan,
>
> While I have the same opinion as you that "No one should be able to block a
> release on their own". I also agree that the issue should be posted to the ML
> for discussion and it is the res
Daan,
I was using the term "blocker" in context of a release and hence suggesting
involvement of RM in getting a closure.
In terms of defect categorization, I found this both relevant and helpful -
https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Showstopper.
Regards,
Somesh
-Original Message-
From:
Irrespective of what ever defect an user creates, people involved can always
comment on a bug a downgrade the defect (like Somesh said, RM can do this).
This is a standard process we have used earlier.
My 2 years with this project, I don't remember there was a time when few folks
have create
46 matches
Mail list logo
