+1 (binding) followed the testing procedure
On Sep 6, 2013, at 10:46 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi <animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com> wrote: > > > Thanks > Animesh > > On Sep 6, 2013, at 1:55 PM, "Chip Childers" <chip.child...@sungard.com> wrote: > >> On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 08:18:35PM +0000, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote: >>> >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] >>>> Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 10:21 AM >>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org >>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round) >>>> >>>> Animesh, >>>> >>>> I'd ask that this vote stay open until EOD Monday. I've tested the >>>> basic sig / artifact, but I want an opportunity to run it in an actual >>>> environment before formally voting. >>> [Animesh>] Sure I can keep the VOTE open until Monday. >>>> >>>> Also, there is an issue being raised by Marcus (that Edison was going to >>>> look into) in another thread around the CPVM. Is this a blocker issue? >>> [Animesh>]Edison is working on a fix and will put in 4.2-forward branch. I >>> am not sure who else uses CLVM to access the broader impact, if it is >>> Marcus and he is fine with using Edison's fix in his environment than not >>> an issue. >> >> Ha... I thought it was around the cPvm, not cLvm. >> >> Anyway, I guess it's up to Marcus (and others) to vote accordingly WRT >> there concern about this issue. >> >> Thanks for holding off until EOD Monday for me (and perhaps others) to >> vote! >> >> -chip > > Of course more testing and feedback of RC is better
