+1
Thanks for volunteering Abhishek. As you've worked already as a RM for
CloudStack LTS maintenance releases that you've shared and I think you have all
the necessary experience to work as the 4.19 RM.
Daan, I don't see any mention of log4j on this thread or feel that Abhishek has
disregarded
+1 (binding)
The tarball/source and signatures are okay:
# gpg --verify apache-cloudstack-cloudmonkey-6.3.0-src.tar.bz2.asc
gpg: assuming signed data in 'apache-cloudstack-cloudmonkey-6.3.0-src.tar.bz2'
gpg: Signature made Mon May 1 19:36:51 2023 IST
gpg:using RSA key 4A64E2F46BB
Hi Daniel,
It was just my opinion it is based on the reasons that it is something that
we haven't seen any request in the community before and it will create some
challenges for the releases, forward-merging bug-fixes and also for any
existing integrations that users might be having.
To be specifi
All,
Update - All content and pages from the current website and blogs until Feb
have been migrated to the following staging website. Only a few new blog posts
aren't migrated, I've asked ASF-infra to share the latest dump on the same.
Alternatively, they may be manually added by contributors.
Daan, Rohit and others,
Personally, I don't see log4j2 PR alone or one particular feature/PR that
can be the reason for managing the release. Though I certainly understand
it may create some additional work for the RM.
Since Daniel also has an interest in being the RM for the 4.19 release, is
happ
+1 (binding),
monkey tested (no pun intended)
connected to different local and remote envs bot by restarting and set
profile commands.
tried different commands and command completions
Also trusting on Rohit's due diligence
On Wed, May 3, 2023 at 11:32 AM Rohit Yadav
wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> T
On Wed, May 3, 2023 at 11:19 AM Rohit Yadav
wrote:
> +1
>
> Thanks for volunteering Abhishek. As you've worked already as a RM for
> CloudStack LTS maintenance releases that you've shared and I think you have
> all the necessary experience to work as the 4.19 RM.
>
> Daan, I don't see any mention
On Wed, May 3, 2023 at 12:01 PM Abhishek Kumar wrote:
> Daan, Rohit and others,
>
> Personally, I don't see log4j2 PR alone or one particular feature/PR that
> can be the reason for managing the release. Though I certainly understand
> it may create some additional work for the RM.
>
I definitely
All,
I would like to bring attention to and refer to a comment I made on the PR a
few weeks ago
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/7131#issuecomment-1488671229 and good
to see this finally being discussed. Thanks João for starting this ML thread
and all the hard work you and other contri
Thanks again for another iteration of the review Ivet;
* I wouldn't in this iteration change too many graphics/design elements,
I've tried to keep the staging website more or less similar to the current
website in terms of layout, content. I would suggest that we can do this later
(in fact
Ivet, All,
Thanks for reporting and suggesting. The mailing list strips off
attachments/images, may I ask to report any/all outstanding issues,
enhancements, and features for the website here to help us track and address
them in a structured manner:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-www/issu
Hi all,
Nux, thanks for the advice on communication, it makes perfect sense.
Regarding Rohit's points, these are my thoughts about them:
- Reload4J is a project with the goal of fixing pressing security issues
for 1.2.17 and its community does not seem to have the goal of adding new
features, as
Daniel,
On your remarks;
* The currently logging process indeed allows us to make changes to the log
config xml which is read by the framework to affect what is logged, without
restarting say the management server, kvm agent or the ssvm/cpvm agents. Few of
my colleagues have confirmed this
13 matches
Mail list logo
