Andrea, Ignasi - Looking at the list, here are my thoughts for this release:
To include (if possible): - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-1331 - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-1304 / https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-1282 - see comment in Jira, seem to be the same and it seems like Vikas has a PR adding support - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-1291 - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-1230 - whatever incremental improvements there are / can be done TBD (depending on scope): - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-1305 - currently there is work going on here, but I don’t know the overall time frame. I plan on circling back to get feasibility on such - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-1301 - I haven’t run into this myself, don’t know the scope. Crashes are bad, see m’kay. - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-1330 - It looks like there is some work here, but behavior should be consistent with other Providers. Deleting a VM on Azure won’t delete the network; deleting the resource group will. Not to include due to scope of change/generalization: - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-1294 - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-1296 - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-1298 - Adding async support as well as generalized retry likely impact code outside of azure-arm provider. Retry should identify areas where relevant support is needed, then scoped. To discuss, new feature(s) currently being worked on: - VM Scale Set support is currently being worked on. I’ve asked Julio Colon to open an issue on this. As noted in another thread, this is a Provider-only API layer as the higher level generalization doesn’t exist. Should this work be included as part of this promotion? If he can’t finish the PR this week, it might be a couple of weeks out. Thoughts? Thanks -jim spring On September 6, 2017 at 8:49:08 AM, Jim Spring (jmspr...@gmail.com) wrote: Ignasi - A couple of the open issues listed are being worked on. I will know a bit more tomorrow about the status/timing on those tomorrow after a couple of meetings. I’ll also take a look at a couple of the issues where Duncan has a potential fix/etc. and comment. -jim On September 5, 2017 at 1:55:31 AM, Ignasi Barrera (n...@apache.org) wrote: Regarding the promotion of the ARM provider (I'd pretty much like that to happen too), should we fix first any of the open issues? https://s.apache.org/76Fq On 5 September 2017 at 09:49, Jim Spring <jmspr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Andrea - > > Just to clarify re: azure-arm — promotion from jclouds-labs to jclouds as a > non-labs provider? That would be excellent and I’m willing to contribute > the time to make sure that happens. As in another thread - there is some > new work going on, but it’s new features. I corrected some issues I saw > re: Oauth after some refactoring. > > Let me know how I can help. > > I’m for this “promotion” and new release. > > -jim > > > On September 5, 2017 at 12:31:25 AM, Andrea Turli (andrea.tu...@gmail.com) > wrote: > > Hi! > > It's been about two months since jclouds 2.0.2 and I'd like to propose (and > volunteer) to release 2.1.0. > > In fact I don't think 2.0.3 is what we want now, but open to suggestions. > > There are many improvements to Azure ARM which I think it is now mature > enough to be promoted and several bug fixes and improvements to other > providers that will be for sure useful for users. > > What do you guys think? > > Best, > Andrea
