Hi Voloshanenko,
Thanks for reporting and sharing, I'll kick some tests.
- Rohit
From: Voloshanenko Igor
Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2017 6:29:46 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: PrivateGateaway ACL rules blocker
Hi all!
Guys, can i please kindly
Tnx a lot Rohit!
As we only handle a special case - I think all tests will pass without any
issues. As I can't imagine that somebody assumed inside test to check if
buggy condition passed :D
2017-12-20 13:02 GMT+02:00 Rohit Yadav :
> Hi Voloshanenko,
>
>
> Thanks for reporting and sharing, I'll
Sure, I've kicked some tests. Will merge when tests pass and we've some
review/feedback from others.
-Rohit
From: Voloshanenko Igor
Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2017 5:33:10 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: PrivateGateaway ACL rules blocker
Tnx a
Kris,
With on-going PR review/merging, it is requested to engage in those PRs and fix
merge conflicts that may happen again as other PRs merge.
I would also like to encourage you and other Nuage folks to review other PRs
and engage on outstanding review comments and questions.
- Rohit
Hi Marc,
I like the idea, I guess a locking-service was needed in CloudStack to no only
solve the issue of locking and getting rid of DB-based lock (which I suppose if
we can get rid of, may help people migrate to mysql-clusters with active-active
setup which cannot be used due to LOCK usage),
Hi Ivan,
Thanks for the PR, I think that would be a good idea. We can introduce such a
checker/task in Travis's first job that currently does some sanity checks
(rat+build+unit tests etc).
- Rohit
From: Ivan Kudryavtsev
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2017 12:48
Hi Mike,
Yes, please send a PR!
- Rohit
From: Tutkowski, Mike
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2017 2:08:42 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Bug in ViewResponseHelper.java of 4627fb2
Hi,
I noticed an issue today with a fairly recent commit: 4627fb2.
In
+1 we are rebasing our outstanding PR's on daily basis
Totally agree with reviewing other PRs as well; we are doing this already
and will increase those efforts in 2018.
Thanks
kris
On 20 December 2017 at 13:18, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> Kris,
>
>
> With on-going PR review/merging, it is request
+1
On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Rohit Yadav
wrote:
> Hi Ivan,
>
>
> Thanks for the PR, I think that would be a good idea. We can introduce
> such a checker/task in Travis's first job that currently does some sanity
> checks (rat+build+unit tests etc).
>
>
> - Rohit
>
> _
Hi Ivan,
I took some time to reflect and get back to you:
I agree the freeze date may be a bit aggressive, based on past experiences that
we've all seen the final release may take some time (weeks even). After the
freeze, we can all work towards the stability, fix bugs for a stable and proper
like the idea Ivan, I hope it won't be enforced though, and just a help.
Coders are notorious for using spelling to distinguish between instances.
On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 1:36 PM, Rafael Weingärtner <
rafaelweingart...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Rohit Yadav
> wr
@rhtyd
Could something be done to avoid confusing people pushing PR to have
trillian test failures, which apparently are know to fail all the time or
often? I know it's hard to keep the tests in good shape and make them run
smoothly but I find it very disturbing and therefore I have to admit I'm
n
Test passed.
So will wait till your guys will have time to review this one-liner and
merge it )
2017-12-20 14:16 GMT+02:00 Rohit Yadav :
> Sure, I've kicked some tests. Will merge when tests pass and we've some
> review/feedback from others.
>
>
> -Rohit
>
>
> Fro
Hi Marc,
You've raised a very valid concern. When we've known list of smoketest
failures, it's understandable that most people may not understand how to
interpret them and ignore them. Access to the Trillian environment is another
issue. I don't have all the answers and a solution ot these pro
If a "freeze" means no new functionality can be added but testing and
bug fixes continue until a decision is made that 4.11.0 is ready for
release, that makes an early freeze more desirable rather than a later
freeze. if the goal is to get a LTS replacement for 4.10 as soon as
possible.
Any b
Hi Marc-Aurèle, (and everyone else)
The title probably is slightly incorrect. It should really say known Marvin
test failures. Trillian is the automation that creates the environments to run
the tests in, the tests are purely those that are in Marvin codebase so anyone
can repeat them. In fa
While cleaning up the tests is there any value in splitting out tests
that are redundant
- test that test low level functions whose failures will be picked up in
other tests of higher level functions
- tests that are run on modules that "never" change.
The lower level test may still be useful f
17 matches
Mail list logo
