I think everything is up to date and correct now. Please let me know if anything seems out of place (this is the first time I have done this).
I will wait to do an official announcement until Monday in case anything comes up. I will also wait to update the following things until Monday: http://cloudstack.apache.org/downloads.html and the release notes (cause I have to finish them). Let me know if you have questions. Should I be cutting a 4.8.1 release as well? Not sure how that works. Remi said to do the 4.9.0 release first and then take care of the 4.8.1 release after. Ideas? *Will STEVENS* Lead Developer *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 12:13 PM, Will Stevens <wstev...@cloudops.com> wrote: > Yep, in the process of getting the release cut. Got side tracked by > people a few times, but I am almost finished... I will keep you posted... > > *Will STEVENS* > Lead Developer > > *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts > 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 > w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ > > On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 12:10 PM, Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com> > wrote: > >> Thank you Will. Please cut the 4.9 branch so it can be picked for LTS >> release work. >> >> I'll publish the rpm/deb packages in the sb hosted upstream repo shortly. >> >> Regards. >> >> >> >> >> rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com >> www.shapeblue.com >> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK >> @shapeblue >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 7:27 PM +0530, "Will Stevens" < >> wstev...@cloudops.com<mailto:wstev...@cloudops.com>> wrote: >> >> Sorry, I did not follow the correct format. :P >> >> After 72 hours, the vote for CloudStack 4.9.0 *passes* with 6 PMC + 2 >> non-PMC votes. >> >> +1 (PMC / binding) >> * Rohit Yadav >> * Mike Tutkowski >> * Wido den Hollander >> * Milamber >> * Nux! >> * John Burwell >> >> +1 (non binding) >> * Paul Angus >> * Abhinandan Prateek >> >> 0 >> none >> >> -1 >> none >> >> Thanks to everyone participating. >> >> *Will STEVENS* >> Lead Developer >> >> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts >> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 >> w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ >> >> On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 9:44 AM, Will Stevens <wstev...@cloudops.com> >> wrote: >> >> > The vote is closed. The RC passed with the following votes. >> > >> > +1 : 8 (including 6 binding) >> > +0 : 0 >> > -1 : 0 >> > >> > Thanks everyone, I will get this pushed out today... >> > >> > *Will STEVENS* >> > Lead Developer >> > >> > *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts >> > 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 >> > w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ >> > >> > On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 5:24 AM, Abhinandan Prateek < >> > abhinandan.prat...@shapeblue.com> wrote: >> > >> >> +1 >> >> >> >> Did manual testing with a cluster of Xen 6.5 in advanced zone. >> >> Vm life cycle >> >> VM Snapshot, volume snapshots >> >> Volume and Template from snapshots >> >> Migration >> >> Change Password >> >> Change service offering >> >> VPC, multiple tiers, VMs, ACLs >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> -abhi >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 29/07/16, 1:43 AM, "John Burwell" <john.burw...@shapeblue.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >All, >> >> > >> >> >I vote +1 (binding). We have tested 4.9.0 RC2 in the following >> >> environments: >> >> > >> >> > • CentOS 6.8 management server + CentOS 6.8 KVM Hosts using NFS >> >> primary and secondary storage (would allow us to verify/fix the >> documented >> >> libvirt/qemu versions) >> >> > • CentOS 6.8 management server + vCenter 5.5u3d + ESXi 5.5u3b >> >> using NFS primary and secondary storage >> >> > • CentOS 6.8 management server + vCenter 6.0u2 + ESXi Express >> >> Patch 6 using NFS primary and secondary storage >> >> > • CentOS 6.8 management server + XenServer 6.2 SP1 using NFS >> >> primary and secondary storage >> >> > • CentOS 6.8 management server + XenServer 6.5 SP1 using NFS >> >> primary and secondary storage >> >> > >> >> >For each environment, we have run the following tests: >> >> > >> >> > • All smoke tests >> >> > • test_accounts.py >> >> > • test_acl_*.py >> >> > • test_sharednetwork*.py >> >> > • test_add_remove_network.py >> >> > • test_advancedsg_networks.py >> >> > • test_affinity_groups*.py >> >> > • test_cpu_domain_limits.py >> >> > • test_cpu_limits.py >> >> > • test_cpu_max_limits.py >> >> > • test_host_maintenance.py >> >> > • test_memory_limits.py >> >> > • test_network_offering.py >> >> > • test_overcommit.py >> >> > • test_persistent_networks.py >> >> > • test_ps_domain_limits.py >> >> > • test_ps_limits.py >> >> > • test_ps_max_limits.py >> >> > • test_ps_resize_volume.py >> >> > • test_ps_resource_limits_volume.py >> >> > • test_resource_limits.py >> >> > • test_routers.py >> >> > • test_security_groups.py >> >> > • test_shared_networks.py >> >> > • test_snapshots.py >> >> > • test_ss_domain_limits.py >> >> > • test_ss_limits.py >> >> > • test_ss_max_limits.py >> >> > • test_templates.py >> >> > • test_update_vm.py >> >> > • test_volumes.py >> >> > • test_vpc.py >> >> > >> >> >During our tests, we found the following issues, but do not see any of >> >> them as blockers: >> >> > >> >> > • As Paul and Boris noted, the >> >> test_01_create_redundant_VPC_2tiers_4VMs_4IPs_4PF_ACL in >> >> test_vpc_redundant.py fails. We are uncertain as to whether this >> failure >> >> is caused by a defect, a problem with the test case, or our test >> >> environment. >> >> > • We have seen NPEs in the log every 10 minutes attempting to >> >> garbage collect a non-existent XenServer volume previously attached to >> a >> >> VR. While ugly, it is not leaving unused volumes to consume disk >> space. >> >> > >> >> >Thanks, >> >> >-John >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >john.burw...@shapeblue.com >> >> >www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com> >> >> >53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK >> >> >@shapeblue >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >On Jul 28, 2016, at 12:55 PM, Paul Angus <paul.an...@shapeblue.com> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> I'm getting a pass on KVM for >> >> /marvin/test/integration/smoke/test_vpc_redundant.py >> >> >> And a FAIL on VMware for the same test, with the same error. >> >> >> >> >> >> 2016-07-28 04:00:52,133 - CRITICAL - FAILED: >> >> test_01_create_redundant_VPC_2tiers_4VMs_4IPs_4PF_ACL: ['Traceback >> (most >> >> recent call last):\n', ' File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/unittest/case.py", >> >> line 369, in run\n testMethod()\n', ' File >> >> "/marvin/test/integration/smoke/test_vpc_redundant.py", line 537, in >> >> test_01_create_redundant_VPC_2tiers_4VMs_4IPs_4PF_ACL\n >> >> self.check_routers_state(1)\n', ' File >> >> "/marvin/test/integration/smoke/test_vpc_redundant.py", line 304, in >> >> check_routers_state\n self.query_routers(count, showall)\n', ' File >> >> "/marvin/test/integration/smoke/test_vpc_redundant.py", line 297, in >> >> query_routers\n "Check that %s routers were indeed created" % >> count)\n', >> >> ' File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/unittest/case.py", line 553, in >> >> assertEqual\n assertion_func(first, second, msg=msg)\n', ' File >> >> "/usr/lib64/python2.7/unittest/case.py", line 546, in >> _baseAssertEqual\n >> >> raise self.failureException(msg)\n', 'AssertionError: Check that 1 >> routers >> >> were indeed created\n'] >> >> >> >> >> >> Kind regards, >> >> >> >> >> >> Paul Angus >> >> >> >> >> >> paul.an...@shapeblue.com >> >> >> www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com> >> >> >> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK >> >> >> @shapeblue >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> >> From: williamstev...@gmail.com [mailto:williamstev...@gmail.com] On >> >> Behalf Of Will Stevens >> >> >> Sent: 28 July 2016 17:24 >> >> >> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org >> >> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.9.0 RC2 >> >> >> >> >> >> The teardown issue looks to be environmental. Apparently the >> network >> >> did not get cleaned up before the network service offering using it was >> >> attempted to be deleted. >> >> >> >> >> >> I am not sure about the test_vpc_redundent test failure. I run that >> >> test all the time on KVM and have not been getting that problem. Do >> you >> >> get the same thing if you run it again in your environment? >> >> >> >> >> >> *Will STEVENS* >> >> >> Lead Developer >> >> >> >> >> >> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts >> >> >> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 w cloudops.com *|* >> tw >> >> @CloudOps_ >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 12:00 PM, Boris Stoyanov < >> >> boris.stoya...@shapeblue.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>> Hi we’ve run: test_vpc_redundant and got : >> >> >>> >> >> >>> 2016-07-28 16:36:29,959 - CRITICAL - FAILED: >> test_05_rvpc_multi_tiers: >> >> >>> ['Traceback (most recent call last):\n', ' File >> >> >>> "/usr/lib64/python2.7/unittest/case.py", line 369, in run\n >> >> >>> testMethod()\n', ' File >> >> >>> "/marvin/test/integration/smoke/test_vpc_redundant.py", line 620, >> in >> >> >>> test_05_rvpc_multi_tiers\n self.check_routers_state()\n', ' >> File >> >> >>> "/marvin/test/integration/smoke/test_vpc_redundant.py", line 353, >> in >> >> >>> check_routers_state\n self.fail("Expected \'%s\' routers at >> state >> >> >>> \'%s\', but found \'%s\'!" % (expected_count, status_to_check, >> >> >>> cnts[vals.index(status_to_check)]))\n', ' File >> >> >>> "/usr/lib64/python2.7/unittest/case.py", line 450, in fail\n >> raise >> >> >>> self.failureException(msg)\n', "AssertionError: Expected '1' >> routers >> >> >>> at state 'MASTER', but found '0'!\n"] >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Deleting network offering while in use? >> >> >>> >> >> >>> 2016-07-28 16:38:41,560 - CRITICAL - EXCEPTION: >> >> test_05_rvpc_multi_tiers: >> >> >>> ['Traceback (most recent call last):\n', ' File >> >> >>> "/usr/lib64/python2.7/unittest/case.py", line 398, in run\n >> >> >>> self.tearDown()\n', ' File >> >> >>> "/marvin/test/integration/smoke/test_vpc_redundant.py", line 281, >> in >> >> >>> tearDown\n raise Exception("Warning: Exception during cleanup : >> >> %s" % >> >> >>> e)\n', "Exception: Warning: Exception during cleanup : Execute cmd: >> >> >>> deletenetworkoffering failed, due to: errorCode: 431, >> errorText:Can't >> >> >>> delete network offering 35 as its used by 1 networks. To make the >> >> >>> network offering unavaiable, disable it\n"] >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Our setup is centos68 with xen6.2 hosts. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> boris.stoya...@shapeblue.com >> >> >>> www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com> >> >> >>> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK @shapeblue >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> On Jul 27, 2016, at 6:20 PM, Haijiao <18602198...@163.com<mailto: >> >> >>> 18602198...@163.com>> wrote: >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Hi, Gents >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Anyone tested RC2 with redudant VR configuration ? I think there >> are >> >> some >> >> >>> issues not fixed yet, e.g. password server. >> >> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9385 >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> We will test these days and come back. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > >> >> >> >> abhinandan.prat...@shapeblue.com >> >> www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com> >> >> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK >> >> @shapeblue >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >
