Re: [VOTE] CentOS 7 KVM binaries

[Wei ZHOU]

oh wait, is there any word saying removing the  support for centos7 with
stock qemu ?

-Wei

On Wed, 2 Mar 2022 at 07:38, Rohit Yadav  wrote:

> I had assumed this was a non-technical discussion/vote where the changes
> are made in docs on suggested changes to how CloudStack is deployed and
> used with CentOS7. I assumed this will follow as a doc PR to the QIG.
>
> Changes to docs aren't normally considered technical as per our project
> bylaws as they don't impact changes in source code or releases. Three
> different PMCs have already advised on this thread that voting isn't
> mandatory for this.
>
> However, assuming Daniel has followed the bylaws and is suggesting this as
> a technical change that removes support in source code or releases, then I
> oppose such a change.
>
> -1 (binding/veto) if we're going to technically remove support for centos7
> with stock qemu, that is in source code and packaging/releases. CentOS7
> will EOL until 2024 and stock support should be supported until then.
>
> Regards.
>
>
>
>
> 
> From: Daniel Augusto Veronezi Salvador 
> Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2022 2:31:21 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org 
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] CentOS 7 KVM binaries
>
> Rohit,
>
> As we are deciding a requirement for deploying ACS + KVM + CentOS 7, I
> see it as an important technical decision, that is why I started the
> voting thread. The discussion was made via another thread[¹]; therefore,
> this vote was created with the intention to summarize the discussion we
> had and then to officially approve (or not approve) the idea discussed.
>
> Finally, to emphasize, this is the voting thread, intended to reflect
> the decision we seem to have agreed upon in the other thread[¹]. I would
> kindly ask to avoid polluting this thread with discussions not related
> to the voting itself. Furthermore, as already stated, there is a
> consensus in the discussion thread; therefore, there is no harm in
> giving a +1 here.
>
> Best regards,
> Daniel Salvador
>
> [¹] https://lists.apache.org/thread/z7s0774n72v4o9dnl140wvm030bxovjd
>
> On 01/03/2022 16:56, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> > (phone issue sent draft accidentally)... where consensus is built
> without opposition. Therefore this vote thread isn't necessary.
> >
> > Refer to project bylaws https://cloudstack.apache.org/bylaws.html
> >
> > Regards.
> > 
> > From: Daniel Augusto Veronezi Salvador 
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 5:08:55 PM
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org 
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] CentOS 7 KVM binaries
> >
> > Hi, Andrija and Paul,
> >
> > This is the vote thread, not the discussion one. The goal of this thread
> > is to account votes to verify the agreement of the community with the
> > proposed solution that we seem to have in the discussion thread. For
> > discussions, please refer to the discussion thread[¹].
> > The goal is to collect +1 and -1 to show the community agreement with
> > the proposal that we discussed.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Daniel Salvador
> >
> >
> > [¹] https://lists.apache.org/thread/z7s0774n72v4o9dnl140wvm030bxovjd
> >
> >
> > On 28/02/2022 20:04, Andrija Panic wrote:
> >> What Paul said...
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> > On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 at 22:01, Paul Angus  wrote:
> >>
> >>> A vote really isn't required for this.
> >>>
> >>> No one disagrees, so just do it.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Kind Regards
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Paul Angus
> >>>
> >>> -Original Message-
> >>> From: Wei ZHOU 
> >>> Sent: Monday, February 28, 2022 4:19 PM
> >>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> >>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] CentOS 7 KVM binaries
> >>>
> >>> +1 (binding)
> >>>
> >>> Daniel, does this need to be approved by the PMC ?
> >>>
> >>> -Wei
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 at 17:08, Daniel Salvador  >
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
>  Hi all, this is the vote thread that emerged from the thread
>  "[Discussion] CentOS 7 KVM binaries"[¹].
> 
>  As discussed in the thread, users already install (without any
>  official guide provided by the community) the qemu-kvm-ev binary in
>  their environments to run CloudStack + CentOS + KVM with all features.
> 
>  With that said, to solve the situation described in the discussion
>  thread[¹], I propose the following:
> 
>  - On CloudStack's Installation Guide > Host KVM Installation[²], we
>  add a section guiding users to install the qemu-kvm-ev binaries, if
>  they are using CentOS 7.
>  - The packages that we will guide users to install will be the
>  latest provided by the official CentOS site[³] (the current latest
>  version is '2.12.0-44.1.el7_8.1.x86_64').
> 
>  For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to
>  indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
> 
>  [ ] +1 approve
>  [ ] +0 no opinion
>  [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
> 
>  If this gets approved, I'll open a PR on CloudStack Documentation
>  repository[⁴].
> 

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.16.1.0 (RC2)

[Harikrishna Patnala]

+1

Tested on a VMware environment with VM and volume operations on NFS and 
Datastore Cluster storage types and a few network operations.

Thanks,
Harikrishna

From: Rohit Yadav 
Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2022 1:20 AM
To: dev 
Cc: users 
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.16.1.0 (RC2)

+1 (binding)

Regards.

From: Gabriel Br?scher 
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 9:41:25 PM
To: dev 
Cc: users 
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.16.1.0 (RC2)

+1 on continuing with RC2 Vote.

On Tue, Mar 1, 2022, 17:03 Vladimir Petrov 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Voting +1
>
> I did a lot of upgrade tests with pre-RC, RC1 and RC2 versions, using
> different hypervisors and from different versions (4.11, 4.13, 4.15.2,
> 4.16.0). I also tested main workflows and basic operations and haven't
> found a single issue.
>
> Best wishes,
> Vladi
>
>
> Suresh Anaparti wrote:
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> I have created a 4.16.1.0 release (RC2), with the following artifacts up
> for testing and a vote:
>
> Git Branch and Commit SHA:
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/tree/4.16.1.0-RC20220225T1901
> Commit: cad9332082a1f85eedc30cf547ae28224be170c2
>
> Source release (checksums and signatures are available at the same
> location):
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/cloudstack/4.16.1.0/
>
> PGP release keys (signed using D6E0581ECF8A2FBE3FF6B3C9D7CEAE3A9E71D0AA):
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/cloudstack/KEYS
>
> The vote will be open until 2nd March 2022.
>
> For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to
> indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
>
> [ ] +1  approve
> [ ] +0  no opinion
> [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
>
> For users convenience, the packages from this release candidate (RC2) and
> 4.16.1 systemvm templates are available here:
> https://download.cloudstack.org/testing/4.16.1.0-RC2/
> https://download.cloudstack.org/systemvm/4.16/
>
> Documentation is not published yet, but the following may be referenced
> for upgrade related tests:
> (there's a new 4.16.1 systemvm template to be registered prior to upgrade)
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/tree/4.16/source/upgrading/upgrade
>
> NOTES on the issues fixed in this RC2 release:
>
> (these do *NOT* require a full retest if you were testing RC1 already -
> just if you were affected by these issues):
> - https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/6017 (regression in
> register template form
> when select/unselect check boxes using space in keyboard)
> - https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/6026 (affects volumes on
> managed storages when
> stopping or migrating a VM)
> - https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/6038 (regression in SSVM
> scaling down behavior,
> new config 'secstorage.vm.auto.scale.down' added to control scaling down)
>
>
> Regards,
> Suresh
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>




 

Re: [VOTE] CentOS 7 KVM binaries

[Rohit Yadav]

I had assumed this was a non-technical discussion/vote where the changes are 
made in docs on suggested changes to how CloudStack is deployed and used with 
CentOS7. I assumed this will follow as a doc PR to the QIG.

Changes to docs aren't normally considered technical as per our project bylaws 
as they don't impact changes in source code or releases. Three different PMCs 
have already advised on this thread that voting isn't mandatory for this.

However, assuming Daniel has followed the bylaws and is suggesting this as a 
technical change that removes support in source code or releases, then I oppose 
such a change.

-1 (binding/veto) if we're going to technically remove support for centos7 with 
stock qemu, that is in source code and packaging/releases. CentOS7 will EOL 
until 2024 and stock support should be supported until then.

Regards.





From: Daniel Augusto Veronezi Salvador 
Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2022 2:31:21 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org 
Subject: Re: [VOTE] CentOS 7 KVM binaries

Rohit,

As we are deciding a requirement for deploying ACS + KVM + CentOS 7, I
see it as an important technical decision, that is why I started the
voting thread. The discussion was made via another thread[¹]; therefore,
this vote was created with the intention to summarize the discussion we
had and then to officially approve (or not approve) the idea discussed.

Finally, to emphasize, this is the voting thread, intended to reflect
the decision we seem to have agreed upon in the other thread[¹]. I would
kindly ask to avoid polluting this thread with discussions not related
to the voting itself. Furthermore, as already stated, there is a
consensus in the discussion thread; therefore, there is no harm in
giving a +1 here.

Best regards,
Daniel Salvador

[¹] https://lists.apache.org/thread/z7s0774n72v4o9dnl140wvm030bxovjd

On 01/03/2022 16:56, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> (phone issue sent draft accidentally)... where consensus is built without 
> opposition. Therefore this vote thread isn't necessary.
>
> Refer to project bylaws https://cloudstack.apache.org/bylaws.html
>
> Regards.
> 
> From: Daniel Augusto Veronezi Salvador 
> Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 5:08:55 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org 
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] CentOS 7 KVM binaries
>
> Hi, Andrija and Paul,
>
> This is the vote thread, not the discussion one. The goal of this thread
> is to account votes to verify the agreement of the community with the
> proposed solution that we seem to have in the discussion thread. For
> discussions, please refer to the discussion thread[¹].
> The goal is to collect +1 and -1 to show the community agreement with
> the proposal that we discussed.
>
> Best regards,
> Daniel Salvador
>
>
> [¹] https://lists.apache.org/thread/z7s0774n72v4o9dnl140wvm030bxovjd
>
>
> On 28/02/2022 20:04, Andrija Panic wrote:
>> What Paul said...
>>
>
>
>
 

> On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 at 22:01, Paul Angus  wrote:
>>
>>> A vote really isn't required for this.
>>>
>>> No one disagrees, so just do it.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Kind Regards
>>>
>>>
>>> Paul Angus
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Wei ZHOU 
>>> Sent: Monday, February 28, 2022 4:19 PM
>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] CentOS 7 KVM binaries
>>>
>>> +1 (binding)
>>>
>>> Daniel, does this need to be approved by the PMC ?
>>>
>>> -Wei
>>>
>>> On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 at 17:08, Daniel Salvador 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi all, this is the vote thread that emerged from the thread
 "[Discussion] CentOS 7 KVM binaries"[¹].

 As discussed in the thread, users already install (without any
 official guide provided by the community) the qemu-kvm-ev binary in
 their environments to run CloudStack + CentOS + KVM with all features.

 With that said, to solve the situation described in the discussion
 thread[¹], I propose the following:

 - On CloudStack's Installation Guide > Host KVM Installation[²], we
 add a section guiding users to install the qemu-kvm-ev binaries, if
 they are using CentOS 7.
 - The packages that we will guide users to install will be the
 latest provided by the official CentOS site[³] (the current latest
 version is '2.12.0-44.1.el7_8.1.x86_64').

 For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to
 indicate "(binding)" with their vote?

 [ ] +1 approve
 [ ] +0 no opinion
 [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)

 If this gets approved, I'll open a PR on CloudStack Documentation
 repository[⁴].


 Best regards,
 Daniel Salvador


 [¹] https://lists.apache.org/thread/z7s0774n72v4o9dnl140wvm030bxovjd
 [²]

 http://docs.cloudstack.apache.org/en/latest/installguide/hypervisor/kv
 m.html [³]
 http://mirror.centos.org/centos-7/7/virt/x86_64/kvm-common/Packages/q/
 [⁴] https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation

Re: [VOTE] CentOS 7 KVM binaries

[Gabriel Bräscher]

The few times I used CentOS, or when implementing KVM local storage
migration, I always had issues with "stock" CentOS qemu.

I am definitely +1.

On Tue, Mar 1, 2022, 22:01 Daniel Augusto Veronezi Salvador <
dvsalvador...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Rohit,
>
> As we are deciding a requirement for deploying ACS + KVM + CentOS 7, I
> see it as an important technical decision, that is why I started the
> voting thread. The discussion was made via another thread[¹]; therefore,
> this vote was created with the intention to summarize the discussion we
> had and then to officially approve (or not approve) the idea discussed.
>
> Finally, to emphasize, this is the voting thread, intended to reflect
> the decision we seem to have agreed upon in the other thread[¹]. I would
> kindly ask to avoid polluting this thread with discussions not related
> to the voting itself. Furthermore, as already stated, there is a
> consensus in the discussion thread; therefore, there is no harm in
> giving a +1 here.
>
> Best regards,
> Daniel Salvador
>
> [¹] https://lists.apache.org/thread/z7s0774n72v4o9dnl140wvm030bxovjd
>
> On 01/03/2022 16:56, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> > (phone issue sent draft accidentally)... where consensus is built
> without opposition. Therefore this vote thread isn't necessary.
> >
> > Refer to project bylaws https://cloudstack.apache.org/bylaws.html
> >
> > Regards.
> > 
> > From: Daniel Augusto Veronezi Salvador 
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 5:08:55 PM
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org 
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] CentOS 7 KVM binaries
> >
> > Hi, Andrija and Paul,
> >
> > This is the vote thread, not the discussion one. The goal of this thread
> > is to account votes to verify the agreement of the community with the
> > proposed solution that we seem to have in the discussion thread. For
> > discussions, please refer to the discussion thread[¹].
> > The goal is to collect +1 and -1 to show the community agreement with
> > the proposal that we discussed.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Daniel Salvador
> >
> >
> > [¹] https://lists.apache.org/thread/z7s0774n72v4o9dnl140wvm030bxovjd
> >
> >
> > On 28/02/2022 20:04, Andrija Panic wrote:
> >> What Paul said...
> >>
> >
> >
> >> On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 at 22:01, Paul Angus  wrote:
> >>
> >>> A vote really isn't required for this.
> >>>
> >>> No one disagrees, so just do it.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Kind Regards
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Paul Angus
> >>>
> >>> -Original Message-
> >>> From: Wei ZHOU 
> >>> Sent: Monday, February 28, 2022 4:19 PM
> >>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> >>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] CentOS 7 KVM binaries
> >>>
> >>> +1 (binding)
> >>>
> >>> Daniel, does this need to be approved by the PMC ?
> >>>
> >>> -Wei
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 at 17:08, Daniel Salvador  >
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
>  Hi all, this is the vote thread that emerged from the thread
>  "[Discussion] CentOS 7 KVM binaries"[¹].
> 
>  As discussed in the thread, users already install (without any
>  official guide provided by the community) the qemu-kvm-ev binary in
>  their environments to run CloudStack + CentOS + KVM with all features.
> 
>  With that said, to solve the situation described in the discussion
>  thread[¹], I propose the following:
> 
>  - On CloudStack's Installation Guide > Host KVM Installation[²], we
>  add a section guiding users to install the qemu-kvm-ev binaries, if
>  they are using CentOS 7.
>  - The packages that we will guide users to install will be the
>  latest provided by the official CentOS site[³] (the current latest
>  version is '2.12.0-44.1.el7_8.1.x86_64').
> 
>  For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to
>  indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
> 
>  [ ] +1 approve
>  [ ] +0 no opinion
>  [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
> 
>  If this gets approved, I'll open a PR on CloudStack Documentation
>  repository[⁴].
> 
> 
>  Best regards,
>  Daniel Salvador
> 
> 
>  [¹] https://lists.apache.org/thread/z7s0774n72v4o9dnl140wvm030bxovjd
>  [²]
> 
> 
> http://docs.cloudstack.apache.org/en/latest/installguide/hypervisor/kv
>  m.html [³]
> 
> http://mirror.centos.org/centos-7/7/virt/x86_64/kvm-common/Packages/q/
>  [⁴] https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation
> 
>

Re: [VOTE] CentOS 7 KVM binaries

[Daniel Augusto Veronezi Salvador]

Rohit,

As we are deciding a requirement for deploying ACS + KVM + CentOS 7, I 
see it as an important technical decision, that is why I started the 
voting thread. The discussion was made via another thread[¹]; therefore, 
this vote was created with the intention to summarize the discussion we 
had and then to officially approve (or not approve) the idea discussed.


Finally, to emphasize, this is the voting thread, intended to reflect 
the decision we seem to have agreed upon in the other thread[¹]. I would 
kindly ask to avoid polluting this thread with discussions not related 
to the voting itself. Furthermore, as already stated, there is a 
consensus in the discussion thread; therefore, there is no harm in 
giving a +1 here.


Best regards,
Daniel Salvador

[¹] https://lists.apache.org/thread/z7s0774n72v4o9dnl140wvm030bxovjd

On 01/03/2022 16:56, Rohit Yadav wrote:

(phone issue sent draft accidentally)... where consensus is built without 
opposition. Therefore this vote thread isn't necessary.

Refer to project bylaws https://cloudstack.apache.org/bylaws.html

Regards.

From: Daniel Augusto Veronezi Salvador 
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 5:08:55 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org 
Subject: Re: [VOTE] CentOS 7 KVM binaries

Hi, Andrija and Paul,

This is the vote thread, not the discussion one. The goal of this thread
is to account votes to verify the agreement of the community with the
proposed solution that we seem to have in the discussion thread. For
discussions, please refer to the discussion thread[¹].
The goal is to collect +1 and -1 to show the community agreement with
the proposal that we discussed.

Best regards,
Daniel Salvador


[¹] https://lists.apache.org/thread/z7s0774n72v4o9dnl140wvm030bxovjd


On 28/02/2022 20:04, Andrija Panic wrote:

What Paul said...

  


On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 at 22:01, Paul Angus  wrote:


A vote really isn't required for this.

No one disagrees, so just do it.



Kind Regards


Paul Angus

-Original Message-
From: Wei ZHOU 
Sent: Monday, February 28, 2022 4:19 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] CentOS 7 KVM binaries

+1 (binding)

Daniel, does this need to be approved by the PMC ?

-Wei

On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 at 17:08, Daniel Salvador 
wrote:


Hi all, this is the vote thread that emerged from the thread
"[Discussion] CentOS 7 KVM binaries"[¹].

As discussed in the thread, users already install (without any
official guide provided by the community) the qemu-kvm-ev binary in
their environments to run CloudStack + CentOS + KVM with all features.

With that said, to solve the situation described in the discussion
thread[¹], I propose the following:

- On CloudStack's Installation Guide > Host KVM Installation[²], we
add a section guiding users to install the qemu-kvm-ev binaries, if
they are using CentOS 7.
- The packages that we will guide users to install will be the
latest provided by the official CentOS site[³] (the current latest
version is '2.12.0-44.1.el7_8.1.x86_64').

For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to
indicate "(binding)" with their vote?

[ ] +1 approve
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)

If this gets approved, I'll open a PR on CloudStack Documentation
repository[⁴].


Best regards,
Daniel Salvador


[¹] https://lists.apache.org/thread/z7s0774n72v4o9dnl140wvm030bxovjd
[²]

http://docs.cloudstack.apache.org/en/latest/installguide/hypervisor/kv
m.html [³]
http://mirror.centos.org/centos-7/7/virt/x86_64/kvm-common/Packages/q/
[⁴] https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation

Re: [VOTE] CentOS 7 KVM binaries

[Rohit Yadav]

(phone issue sent draft accidentally)... where consensus is built without 
opposition. Therefore this vote thread isn't necessary.

Refer to project bylaws https://cloudstack.apache.org/bylaws.html

Regards.

From: Daniel Augusto Veronezi Salvador 
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 5:08:55 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org 
Subject: Re: [VOTE] CentOS 7 KVM binaries

Hi, Andrija and Paul,

This is the vote thread, not the discussion one. The goal of this thread
is to account votes to verify the agreement of the community with the
proposed solution that we seem to have in the discussion thread. For
discussions, please refer to the discussion thread[¹].
The goal is to collect +1 and -1 to show the community agreement with
the proposal that we discussed.

Best regards,
Daniel Salvador


[¹] https://lists.apache.org/thread/z7s0774n72v4o9dnl140wvm030bxovjd


On 28/02/2022 20:04, Andrija Panic wrote:
> What Paul said...
>

 

> On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 at 22:01, Paul Angus  wrote:
>
>> A vote really isn't required for this.
>>
>> No one disagrees, so just do it.
>>
>>
>>
>> Kind Regards
>>
>>
>> Paul Angus
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Wei ZHOU 
>> Sent: Monday, February 28, 2022 4:19 PM
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] CentOS 7 KVM binaries
>>
>> +1 (binding)
>>
>> Daniel, does this need to be approved by the PMC ?
>>
>> -Wei
>>
>> On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 at 17:08, Daniel Salvador 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all, this is the vote thread that emerged from the thread
>>> "[Discussion] CentOS 7 KVM binaries"[¹].
>>>
>>> As discussed in the thread, users already install (without any
>>> official guide provided by the community) the qemu-kvm-ev binary in
>>> their environments to run CloudStack + CentOS + KVM with all features.
>>>
>>> With that said, to solve the situation described in the discussion
>>> thread[¹], I propose the following:
>>>
>>> - On CloudStack's Installation Guide > Host KVM Installation[²], we
>>> add a section guiding users to install the qemu-kvm-ev binaries, if
>>> they are using CentOS 7.
>>>- The packages that we will guide users to install will be the
>>> latest provided by the official CentOS site[³] (the current latest
>>> version is '2.12.0-44.1.el7_8.1.x86_64').
>>>
>>> For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to
>>> indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
>>>
>>> [ ] +1 approve
>>> [ ] +0 no opinion
>>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>>>
>>> If this gets approved, I'll open a PR on CloudStack Documentation
>>> repository[⁴].
>>>
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Daniel Salvador
>>>
>>>
>>> [¹] https://lists.apache.org/thread/z7s0774n72v4o9dnl140wvm030bxovjd
>>> [²]
>>>
>>> http://docs.cloudstack.apache.org/en/latest/installguide/hypervisor/kv
>>> m.html [³]
>>> http://mirror.centos.org/centos-7/7/virt/x86_64/kvm-common/Packages/q/
>>> [⁴] https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation
>>>
>>

Re: [VOTE] CentOS 7 KVM binaries

[Rohit Yadav]

Daniel,

Non-technical discussions that don't affect source code or releases don't need 
voting under cases where consensus is built iunless

From: Daniel Augusto Veronezi Salvador 
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 5:08:55 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org 
Subject: Re: [VOTE] CentOS 7 KVM binaries

Hi, Andrija and Paul,

This is the vote thread, not the discussion one. The goal of this thread
is to account votes to verify the agreement of the community with the
proposed solution that we seem to have in the discussion thread. For
discussions, please refer to the discussion thread[¹].
The goal is to collect +1 and -1 to show the community agreement with
the proposal that we discussed.

Best regards,
Daniel Salvador


[¹] https://lists.apache.org/thread/z7s0774n72v4o9dnl140wvm030bxovjd


On 28/02/2022 20:04, Andrija Panic wrote:
> What Paul said...
>

 

> On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 at 22:01, Paul Angus  wrote:
>
>> A vote really isn't required for this.
>>
>> No one disagrees, so just do it.
>>
>>
>>
>> Kind Regards
>>
>>
>> Paul Angus
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Wei ZHOU 
>> Sent: Monday, February 28, 2022 4:19 PM
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] CentOS 7 KVM binaries
>>
>> +1 (binding)
>>
>> Daniel, does this need to be approved by the PMC ?
>>
>> -Wei
>>
>> On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 at 17:08, Daniel Salvador 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all, this is the vote thread that emerged from the thread
>>> "[Discussion] CentOS 7 KVM binaries"[¹].
>>>
>>> As discussed in the thread, users already install (without any
>>> official guide provided by the community) the qemu-kvm-ev binary in
>>> their environments to run CloudStack + CentOS + KVM with all features.
>>>
>>> With that said, to solve the situation described in the discussion
>>> thread[¹], I propose the following:
>>>
>>> - On CloudStack's Installation Guide > Host KVM Installation[²], we
>>> add a section guiding users to install the qemu-kvm-ev binaries, if
>>> they are using CentOS 7.
>>>- The packages that we will guide users to install will be the
>>> latest provided by the official CentOS site[³] (the current latest
>>> version is '2.12.0-44.1.el7_8.1.x86_64').
>>>
>>> For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to
>>> indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
>>>
>>> [ ] +1 approve
>>> [ ] +0 no opinion
>>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>>>
>>> If this gets approved, I'll open a PR on CloudStack Documentation
>>> repository[⁴].
>>>
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Daniel Salvador
>>>
>>>
>>> [¹] https://lists.apache.org/thread/z7s0774n72v4o9dnl140wvm030bxovjd
>>> [²]
>>>
>>> http://docs.cloudstack.apache.org/en/latest/installguide/hypervisor/kv
>>> m.html [³]
>>> http://mirror.centos.org/centos-7/7/virt/x86_64/kvm-common/Packages/q/
>>> [⁴] https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation
>>>
>>

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.16.1.0 (RC2)

[Rohit Yadav]

+1 (binding)

Regards.

From: Gabriel Br?scher 
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 9:41:25 PM
To: dev 
Cc: users 
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.16.1.0 (RC2)

+1 on continuing with RC2 Vote.

On Tue, Mar 1, 2022, 17:03 Vladimir Petrov 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Voting +1
>
> I did a lot of upgrade tests with pre-RC, RC1 and RC2 versions, using
> different hypervisors and from different versions (4.11, 4.13, 4.15.2,
> 4.16.0). I also tested main workflows and basic operations and haven't
> found a single issue.
>
> Best wishes,
> Vladi
>
>
> Suresh Anaparti wrote:
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> I have created a 4.16.1.0 release (RC2), with the following artifacts up
> for testing and a vote:
>
> Git Branch and Commit SHA:
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/tree/4.16.1.0-RC20220225T1901
> Commit: cad9332082a1f85eedc30cf547ae28224be170c2
>
> Source release (checksums and signatures are available at the same
> location):
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/cloudstack/4.16.1.0/
>
> PGP release keys (signed using D6E0581ECF8A2FBE3FF6B3C9D7CEAE3A9E71D0AA):
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/cloudstack/KEYS
>
> The vote will be open until 2nd March 2022.
>
> For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to
> indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
>
> [ ] +1  approve
> [ ] +0  no opinion
> [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
>
> For users convenience, the packages from this release candidate (RC2) and
> 4.16.1 systemvm templates are available here:
> https://download.cloudstack.org/testing/4.16.1.0-RC2/
> https://download.cloudstack.org/systemvm/4.16/
>
> Documentation is not published yet, but the following may be referenced
> for upgrade related tests:
> (there's a new 4.16.1 systemvm template to be registered prior to upgrade)
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/tree/4.16/source/upgrading/upgrade
>
> NOTES on the issues fixed in this RC2 release:
>
> (these do *NOT* require a full retest if you were testing RC1 already -
> just if you were affected by these issues):
> - https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/6017 (regression in
> register template form
> when select/unselect check boxes using space in keyboard)
> - https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/6026 (affects volumes on
> managed storages when
> stopping or migrating a VM)
> - https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/6038 (regression in SSVM
> scaling down behavior,
> new config 'secstorage.vm.auto.scale.down' added to control scaling down)
>
>
> Regards,
> Suresh
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

 

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.16.1.0 (RC2)

[Gabriel Bräscher]

+1 on continuing with RC2 Vote.

On Tue, Mar 1, 2022, 17:03 Vladimir Petrov 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Voting +1
>
> I did a lot of upgrade tests with pre-RC, RC1 and RC2 versions, using
> different hypervisors and from different versions (4.11, 4.13, 4.15.2,
> 4.16.0). I also tested main workflows and basic operations and haven't
> found a single issue.
>
> Best wishes,
> Vladi
>
>
> Suresh Anaparti wrote:
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> I have created a 4.16.1.0 release (RC2), with the following artifacts up
> for testing and a vote:
>
> Git Branch and Commit SHA:
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/tree/4.16.1.0-RC20220225T1901
> Commit: cad9332082a1f85eedc30cf547ae28224be170c2
>
> Source release (checksums and signatures are available at the same
> location):
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/cloudstack/4.16.1.0/
>
> PGP release keys (signed using D6E0581ECF8A2FBE3FF6B3C9D7CEAE3A9E71D0AA):
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/cloudstack/KEYS
>
> The vote will be open until 2nd March 2022.
>
> For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to
> indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
>
> [ ] +1  approve
> [ ] +0  no opinion
> [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
>
> For users convenience, the packages from this release candidate (RC2) and
> 4.16.1 systemvm templates are available here:
> https://download.cloudstack.org/testing/4.16.1.0-RC2/
> https://download.cloudstack.org/systemvm/4.16/
>
> Documentation is not published yet, but the following may be referenced
> for upgrade related tests:
> (there's a new 4.16.1 systemvm template to be registered prior to upgrade)
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/tree/4.16/source/upgrading/upgrade
>
> NOTES on the issues fixed in this RC2 release:
>
> (these do *NOT* require a full retest if you were testing RC1 already -
> just if you were affected by these issues):
> - https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/6017 (regression in
> register template form
> when select/unselect check boxes using space in keyboard)
> - https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/6026 (affects volumes on
> managed storages when
> stopping or migrating a VM)
> - https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/6038 (regression in SSVM
> scaling down behavior,
> new config 'secstorage.vm.auto.scale.down' added to control scaling down)
>
>
> Regards,
> Suresh
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.16.1.0 (RC2)

[Vladimir Petrov]

Hi all,

Voting +1

I did a lot of upgrade tests with pre-RC, RC1 and RC2 versions, using different 
hypervisors and from different versions (4.11, 4.13, 4.15.2, 4.16.0). I also 
tested main workflows and basic operations and haven't found a single issue.

Best wishes,
Vladi


Suresh Anaparti wrote:


Hi All,

I have created a 4.16.1.0 release (RC2), with the following artifacts up for 
testing and a vote:

Git Branch and Commit SHA:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/tree/4.16.1.0-RC20220225T1901
Commit: cad9332082a1f85eedc30cf547ae28224be170c2

Source release (checksums and signatures are available at the same location):
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/cloudstack/4.16.1.0/

PGP release keys (signed using D6E0581ECF8A2FBE3FF6B3C9D7CEAE3A9E71D0AA):
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/cloudstack/KEYS

The vote will be open until 2nd March 2022.

For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to indicate 
"(binding)" with their vote?

[ ] +1  approve
[ ] +0  no opinion
[ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)

For users convenience, the packages from this release candidate (RC2) and
4.16.1 systemvm templates are available here:
https://download.cloudstack.org/testing/4.16.1.0-RC2/
https://download.cloudstack.org/systemvm/4.16/

Documentation is not published yet, but the following may be referenced for 
upgrade related tests:
(there's a new 4.16.1 systemvm template to be registered prior to upgrade)
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/tree/4.16/source/upgrading/upgrade

NOTES on the issues fixed in this RC2 release:

(these do *NOT* require a full retest if you were testing RC1 already -
just if you were affected by these issues):
- https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/6017 (regression in register 
template form
when select/unselect check boxes using space in keyboard)
- https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/6026 (affects volumes on managed 
storages when
stopping or migrating a VM)
- https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/6038 (regression in SSVM scaling 
down behavior,
new config 'secstorage.vm.auto.scale.down' added to control scaling down)


Regards,
Suresh





 

[GitHub] [cloudstack-documentation] blueorangutan commented on pull request #264: 4.16.1.0 release notes/docs updates

[GitBox]

blueorangutan commented on pull request #264:
URL: 
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/pull/264#issuecomment-1055450017


   Doc build preview: http://qa.cloudstack.cloud/docs/WIP-PROOFING/pr/264. 
(SL-JID 203)


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cloudstack.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

[GitHub] [cloudstack-documentation] blueorangutan commented on pull request #264: 4.16.1.0 release notes/docs updates

[GitBox]

blueorangutan commented on pull request #264:
URL: 
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/pull/264#issuecomment-1055449204


   @sureshanaparti a Jenkins job has been kicked to build the document. I'll 
keep you posted as I make progress.


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cloudstack.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

[GitHub] [cloudstack-documentation] sureshanaparti commented on pull request #264: 4.16.1.0 release notes/docs updates

[GitBox]

sureshanaparti commented on pull request #264:
URL: 
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/pull/264#issuecomment-1055448413


   @blueorangutan docbuild


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cloudstack.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

[GitHub] [cloudstack-documentation] sureshanaparti opened a new pull request #264: 4.16.1.0 release notes/docs updates

[GitBox]

sureshanaparti opened a new pull request #264:
URL: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/pull/264


   4.16.1.0 release notes/docs updates


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cloudstack.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] CentOS 7 KVM binaries

[Sven Vogel]

+1

Cheers,

Sven Vogel
Apache CloudStack PMC member


Am Dienstag, den 03/01/2022 um 12:44 schrieb Slavka Peleva:



Hi everyone,

+1. I'm using it in all my labs (installed from the official repo) and
didn't face any issues like the stock qemu-kvm. Also, a lot of our
customers are using qemu-kvm-ev.

Best regards,
Slavka

On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 1:39 PM Daniel Augusto Veronezi Salvador <
dvsalvador...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi, Andrija and Paul,
>
> This is the vote thread, not the discussion one. The goal of this
thread
> is to account votes to verify the agreement of the community with
the
> proposed solution that we seem to have in the discussion thread. For
> discussions, please refer to the discussion thread[¹].
> The goal is to collect +1 and -1 to show the community agreement
with
> the proposal that we discussed.
>
> Best regards,
> Daniel Salvador
>
>
> [¹]
https://lists.apache.org/thread/z7s0774n72v4o9dnl140wvm030bxovjd
>
>
> On 28/02/2022 20:04, Andrija Panic wrote:
> > What Paul said...
> >
> > On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 at 22:01, Paul Angus  wrote:
> >
> >> A vote really isn't required for this.
> >>
> >> No one disagrees, so just do it.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Kind Regards
> >>
> >>
> >> Paul Angus
> >>
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Wei ZHOU 
> >> Sent: Monday, February 28, 2022 4:19 PM
> >> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] CentOS 7 KVM binaries
> >>
> >> +1 (binding)
> >>
> >> Daniel, does this need to be approved by the PMC ?
> >>
> >> -Wei
> >>
> >> On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 at 17:08, Daniel Salvador 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi all, this is the vote thread that emerged from the thread
> >>> "[Discussion] CentOS 7 KVM binaries"[¹].
> >>>
> >>> As discussed in the thread, users already install (without any
> >>> official guide provided by the community) the qemu-kvm-ev binary
in
> >>> their environments to run CloudStack + CentOS + KVM with all
features.
> >>>
> >>> With that said, to solve the situation described in the
discussion
> >>> thread[¹], I propose the following:
> >>>
> >>> - On CloudStack's Installation Guide > Host KVM
Installation[²], we
> >>> add a section guiding users to install the qemu-kvm-ev binaries,
if
> >>> they are using CentOS 7.
> >>>- The packages that we will guide users to install will
be the
> >>> latest provided by the official CentOS site[³] (the current
latest
> >>> version is '2.12.0-44.1.el7_8.1.x86_64').
> >>>
> >>> For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure
to
> >>> indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
> >>>
> >>> [ ] +1 approve
> >>> [ ] +0 no opinion
> >>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
> >>>
> >>> If this gets approved, I'll open a PR on CloudStack
Documentation
> >>> repository[⁴].
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Best regards,
> >>> Daniel Salvador
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> [¹]
https://lists.apache.org/thread/z7s0774n72v4o9dnl140wvm030bxovjd
> >>> [²]
> >>>
> >>>
http://docs.cloudstack.apache.org/en/latest/installguide/hypervisor/kv
> >>> m.html [³]
> >>>
http://mirror.centos.org/centos-7/7/virt/x86_64/kvm-common/Packages/q/
> >>> [⁴] https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation
> >>>
> >>
>

Re: [VOTE] CentOS 7 KVM binaries

[Slavka Peleva]

Hi everyone,

+1. I'm using it in all my labs (installed from the official repo) and
didn't face any issues like the stock qemu-kvm. Also, a lot of our
customers are using qemu-kvm-ev.

Best regards,
Slavka

On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 1:39 PM Daniel Augusto Veronezi Salvador <
dvsalvador...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi, Andrija and Paul,
>
> This is the vote thread, not the discussion one. The goal of this thread
> is to account votes to verify the agreement of the community with the
> proposed solution that we seem to have in the discussion thread. For
> discussions, please refer to the discussion thread[¹].
> The goal is to collect +1 and -1 to show the community agreement with
> the proposal that we discussed.
>
> Best regards,
> Daniel Salvador
>
>
> [¹] https://lists.apache.org/thread/z7s0774n72v4o9dnl140wvm030bxovjd
>
>
> On 28/02/2022 20:04, Andrija Panic wrote:
> > What Paul said...
> >
> > On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 at 22:01, Paul Angus  wrote:
> >
> >> A vote really isn't required for this.
> >>
> >> No one disagrees, so just do it.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Kind Regards
> >>
> >>
> >> Paul Angus
> >>
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Wei ZHOU 
> >> Sent: Monday, February 28, 2022 4:19 PM
> >> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] CentOS 7 KVM binaries
> >>
> >> +1 (binding)
> >>
> >> Daniel, does this need to be approved by the PMC ?
> >>
> >> -Wei
> >>
> >> On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 at 17:08, Daniel Salvador 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi all, this is the vote thread that emerged from the thread
> >>> "[Discussion] CentOS 7 KVM binaries"[¹].
> >>>
> >>> As discussed in the thread, users already install (without any
> >>> official guide provided by the community) the qemu-kvm-ev binary in
> >>> their environments to run CloudStack + CentOS + KVM with all features.
> >>>
> >>> With that said, to solve the situation described in the discussion
> >>> thread[¹], I propose the following:
> >>>
> >>> - On CloudStack's Installation Guide > Host KVM Installation[²], we
> >>> add a section guiding users to install the qemu-kvm-ev binaries, if
> >>> they are using CentOS 7.
> >>>- The packages that we will guide users to install will be the
> >>> latest provided by the official CentOS site[³] (the current latest
> >>> version is '2.12.0-44.1.el7_8.1.x86_64').
> >>>
> >>> For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to
> >>> indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
> >>>
> >>> [ ] +1 approve
> >>> [ ] +0 no opinion
> >>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
> >>>
> >>> If this gets approved, I'll open a PR on CloudStack Documentation
> >>> repository[⁴].
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Best regards,
> >>> Daniel Salvador
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> [¹] https://lists.apache.org/thread/z7s0774n72v4o9dnl140wvm030bxovjd
> >>> [²]
> >>>
> >>> http://docs.cloudstack.apache.org/en/latest/installguide/hypervisor/kv
> >>> m.html [³]
> >>> http://mirror.centos.org/centos-7/7/virt/x86_64/kvm-common/Packages/q/
> >>> [⁴] https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation
> >>>
> >>
>

Re: [VOTE] CentOS 7 KVM binaries

[Daniel Augusto Veronezi Salvador]

Hi, Andrija and Paul,

This is the vote thread, not the discussion one. The goal of this thread 
is to account votes to verify the agreement of the community with the 
proposed solution that we seem to have in the discussion thread. For 
discussions, please refer to the discussion thread[¹].
The goal is to collect +1 and -1 to show the community agreement with 
the proposal that we discussed.


Best regards,
Daniel Salvador


[¹] https://lists.apache.org/thread/z7s0774n72v4o9dnl140wvm030bxovjd


On 28/02/2022 20:04, Andrija Panic wrote:

What Paul said...

On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 at 22:01, Paul Angus  wrote:


A vote really isn't required for this.

No one disagrees, so just do it.



Kind Regards


Paul Angus

-Original Message-
From: Wei ZHOU 
Sent: Monday, February 28, 2022 4:19 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] CentOS 7 KVM binaries

+1 (binding)

Daniel, does this need to be approved by the PMC ?

-Wei

On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 at 17:08, Daniel Salvador 
wrote:


Hi all, this is the vote thread that emerged from the thread
"[Discussion] CentOS 7 KVM binaries"[¹].

As discussed in the thread, users already install (without any
official guide provided by the community) the qemu-kvm-ev binary in
their environments to run CloudStack + CentOS + KVM with all features.

With that said, to solve the situation described in the discussion
thread[¹], I propose the following:

- On CloudStack's Installation Guide > Host KVM Installation[²], we
add a section guiding users to install the qemu-kvm-ev binaries, if
they are using CentOS 7.
   - The packages that we will guide users to install will be the
latest provided by the official CentOS site[³] (the current latest
version is '2.12.0-44.1.el7_8.1.x86_64').

For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to
indicate "(binding)" with their vote?

[ ] +1 approve
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)

If this gets approved, I'll open a PR on CloudStack Documentation
repository[⁴].


Best regards,
Daniel Salvador


[¹] https://lists.apache.org/thread/z7s0774n72v4o9dnl140wvm030bxovjd
[²]

http://docs.cloudstack.apache.org/en/latest/installguide/hypervisor/kv
m.html [³]
http://mirror.centos.org/centos-7/7/virt/x86_64/kvm-common/Packages/q/
[⁴] https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.16.1.0 (RC2)

[Suresh Anaparti]

Agree with Rohit, and it's a very rare case.

@Gabriel, Do you agree to continue with 4.16.1.0 RC2?

 
Regards,
Suresh

On 01/03/22, 3:10 PM, "Andrija Panic"  wrote:

That makes sense, Rohit, indeed. UUID is impossible to guess.

Gabriel, Suresh?


 

On Tue, 1 Mar 2022 at 09:31, Rohit Yadav  wrote:

> 2cents;
>
> I suppose it's up to the RM to triage and if necessary cut RC3, however,
> if a normal user account can't have the list of resources (uuid, in this
> case network's UUID) then it doesn't appear a critical issue to me for
> 99.99% cases.
>
> Long term - it may be worth doing a broad search for all APIs where a
> similar behaviour may exist (user can't list the resource, but if they 
knew
> the UUID could possible run an API against that).
>
>
>
> Regards.
>
> 
> From: Andrija Panic 
> Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 04:36
> To: dev 
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.16.1.0 (RC2)
>
> By all means, although we could argue that this is NOT a regression, and 
as
> such we might skip it - but it's a security/privacy issue, so we should
> better fix it in RC3, yes.
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 at 16:15, Gabriel Bräscher 
> wrote:
>
> > Hello folks,
> >
> > I would like to raise the issue
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/6049.
> > It affects not only 4.16.1.0 RC2, but also previous releases.
> > I consider it a critical issue, which could potentially impact the need
> for
> > a release candidate #3.
> > Any thoughts?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Gabriel.
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 3:46 PM Nux!  wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (binding)
> > >
> > > Tested KVM in advanced zones (with and without security groups).
> > > Everything seems to be working.
> > >
> > > ---
> > > Nux!
> > > www.nux.ro
> > >
> > > On 2022-02-25 15:08, Suresh Anaparti wrote:
> > > > Hi All,
> > > >
> > > > I have created a 4.16.1.0 release (RC2), with the following 
artifacts
> > > > up for testing and a vote:
> > > >
> > > > Git Branch and Commit SHA:
> > > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/tree/4.16.1.0-RC20220225T1901
> > > > Commit: cad9332082a1f85eedc30cf547ae28224be170c2
> > > >
> > > > Source release (checksums and signatures are available at the same
> > > > location):
> > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/cloudstack/4.16.1.0/
> > > >
> > > > PGP release keys (signed using
> > > > D6E0581ECF8A2FBE3FF6B3C9D7CEAE3A9E71D0AA):
> > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/cloudstack/KEYS
> > > >
> > > > The vote will be open until 2nd March 2022.
> > > >
> > > > For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to
> > > > indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
> > > >
> > > > [ ] +1  approve
> > > > [ ] +0  no opinion
> > > > [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
> > > >
> > > > For users convenience, the packages from this release candidate 
(RC2)
> > > > and
> > > > 4.16.1 systemvm templates are available here:
> > > > https://download.cloudstack.org/testing/4.16.1.0-RC2/
> > > > https://download.cloudstack.org/systemvm/4.16/
> > > >
> > > > Documentation is not published yet, but the following may be
> > > > referenced for upgrade related tests:
> > > > (there's a new 4.16.1 systemvm template to be registered prior to
> > > > upgrade)
> > > >
> > >
> >
> 
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/tree/4.16/source/upgrading/upgrade
> > > >
> > > > NOTES on the issues fixed in this RC2 release:
> > > >
> > > > (these do *NOT* require a full retest if you were testing RC1
> already -
> > > > just if you were affected by these issues):
> > > > - https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/6017 (regression in
> > > > register template form
> > > > when select/unselect check boxes using space in keyboard)
> > > > - https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/6026 (affects volumes
> on
> > > > managed storages when
> > > > stopping or migrating a VM)
> > > > - https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/6038 (regression in
> SSVM
> > > > scaling down behavior,
> > > > new config 'secstorage.vm.auto.scale.down' added to control scaling
> > > > down)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Suresh
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> Andrija Panić
>


-- 

Andrija Panić

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.16.1.0 (RC2)

[Andrija Panic]

That makes sense, Rohit, indeed. UUID is impossible to guess.

Gabriel, Suresh?

On Tue, 1 Mar 2022 at 09:31, Rohit Yadav  wrote:

> 2cents;
>
> I suppose it's up to the RM to triage and if necessary cut RC3, however,
> if a normal user account can't have the list of resources (uuid, in this
> case network's UUID) then it doesn't appear a critical issue to me for
> 99.99% cases.
>
> Long term - it may be worth doing a broad search for all APIs where a
> similar behaviour may exist (user can't list the resource, but if they knew
> the UUID could possible run an API against that).
>
>
>
> Regards.
>
> 
> From: Andrija Panic 
> Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 04:36
> To: dev 
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.16.1.0 (RC2)
>
> By all means, although we could argue that this is NOT a regression, and as
> such we might skip it - but it's a security/privacy issue, so we should
> better fix it in RC3, yes.
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 at 16:15, Gabriel Bräscher 
> wrote:
>
> > Hello folks,
> >
> > I would like to raise the issue
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/6049.
> > It affects not only 4.16.1.0 RC2, but also previous releases.
> > I consider it a critical issue, which could potentially impact the need
> for
> > a release candidate #3.
> > Any thoughts?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Gabriel.
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 3:46 PM Nux!  wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (binding)
> > >
> > > Tested KVM in advanced zones (with and without security groups).
> > > Everything seems to be working.
> > >
> > > ---
> > > Nux!
> > > www.nux.ro
> > >
> > > On 2022-02-25 15:08, Suresh Anaparti wrote:
> > > > Hi All,
> > > >
> > > > I have created a 4.16.1.0 release (RC2), with the following artifacts
> > > > up for testing and a vote:
> > > >
> > > > Git Branch and Commit SHA:
> > > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/tree/4.16.1.0-RC20220225T1901
> > > > Commit: cad9332082a1f85eedc30cf547ae28224be170c2
> > > >
> > > > Source release (checksums and signatures are available at the same
> > > > location):
> > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/cloudstack/4.16.1.0/
> > > >
> > > > PGP release keys (signed using
> > > > D6E0581ECF8A2FBE3FF6B3C9D7CEAE3A9E71D0AA):
> > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/cloudstack/KEYS
> > > >
> > > > The vote will be open until 2nd March 2022.
> > > >
> > > > For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to
> > > > indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
> > > >
> > > > [ ] +1  approve
> > > > [ ] +0  no opinion
> > > > [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
> > > >
> > > > For users convenience, the packages from this release candidate (RC2)
> > > > and
> > > > 4.16.1 systemvm templates are available here:
> > > > https://download.cloudstack.org/testing/4.16.1.0-RC2/
> > > > https://download.cloudstack.org/systemvm/4.16/
> > > >
> > > > Documentation is not published yet, but the following may be
> > > > referenced for upgrade related tests:
> > > > (there's a new 4.16.1 systemvm template to be registered prior to
> > > > upgrade)
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/tree/4.16/source/upgrading/upgrade
> > > >
> > > > NOTES on the issues fixed in this RC2 release:
> > > >
> > > > (these do *NOT* require a full retest if you were testing RC1
> already -
> > > > just if you were affected by these issues):
> > > > - https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/6017 (regression in
> > > > register template form
> > > > when select/unselect check boxes using space in keyboard)
> > > > - https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/6026 (affects volumes
> on
> > > > managed storages when
> > > > stopping or migrating a VM)
> > > > - https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/6038 (regression in
> SSVM
> > > > scaling down behavior,
> > > > new config 'secstorage.vm.auto.scale.down' added to control scaling
> > > > down)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Suresh
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> Andrija Panić
>


-- 

Andrija Panić

Re: [Discussion] CentOS 7 KVM binaries

[Rohit Yadav]

Sounds good to me to move to qemu-kvm-ev, may be worth mentioning the ovirt 
repo in our docs if it is more featureful and widely used/maintained.

Daniel, it wasn't my comment but Andrija's and it's the other way around, the 
official qemu-kvm-ev releases have limitations/regressions. Quoting Andrija's 
comment:

" but keep in mind that the "regular" qemu-kmv-ev from the CentOS SIG repo does 
NOT support live storage migration (up to version 2.12 at least), and 
qemu-kmv-ev from the oVirt repo (essentially a RHEV) need(ed) to be used for 
live storage migration (virsh - - migrate-all...) to work. I'm not sure if this 
has changed. but perhaps Simon or someone using qemu-kmv-ev may"


Regards.


From: Daniel Salvador 
Sent: Monday, February 28, 2022 21:39
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org 
Subject: Re: [Discussion] CentOS 7 KVM binaries

Hi all,


Thank you all for the responses. Based on them (and as expected), to run
CloudStack + CentOS + KVM with all features, users install qemu-kvm-ev,
without any official guide provided by the community (at least no one said
the opposite).

Regarding Rohit's comment, stock qemu-kvm has limitations, qemu-kvm-ev was
created to supply the features limited by the default one.

With that said, I created a vote thread[¹] with the solution proposal for
this situation.


Best regards,
Daniel Salvador


[¹] https://lists.apache.org/thread/0qn12w71vclyklglf6zhp0grg99o4xbx

On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 5:07 PM Nicolas Vazquez <
nicolas.vazq...@shapeblue.com> wrote:

> Thanks Daniel and all,
>
> +1 as well from me. If no objections then we can move forward PR 5297 to
> including it on 4.17 with the remarks Andrija raised.
>
> Regards,
> Nicolas Vazquez
>
>
> From: Sven Vogel 
> Date: Thursday, 24 February 2022 at 19:24
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org 
> Subject: Re: [Discussion] CentOS 7 KVM binaries
> We use only the qemu-kvm-ev.
>
> __
>
> Sven Vogel
> Senior Manager Research and Development - Cloud and Infrastructure
>
> EWERK DIGITAL GmbH
> Brühl 24, D-04109 Leipzig
> P +49 341 42649 - 99
> F +49 341 42649 - 98
> s.vo...@ewerk.com
> www.ewerk.com
>
> Geschäftsführer:
> Dr. Erik Wende, Hendrik Schubert, Markus Böttcher
> Registergericht: Leipzig HRB 9065
>
> Support:
> +49 341 42649 555
>
> Zertifiziert nach:
> ISO/IEC 27001:2013
> DIN EN ISO 9001:2015
> DIN ISO/IEC 2-1:2018
>
> ISAE 3402 Typ II Assessed
>
> EWERK-Blog | LinkedIn<
> https://www.linkedin.com/company/ewerk-group> | Xing<
> https://www.xing.com/company/ewerk> | Twitter<
> https://twitter.com/EWERK_Group> | Facebook<
> https://de-de.facebook.com/EWERK.Group/>
>
>
> Auskünfte und Angebote per Mail sind freibleibend und unverbindlich.
>
> Disclaimer Privacy:
> Der Inhalt dieser E-Mail (einschließlich etwaiger beigefügter Dateien) ist
> vertraulich und nur für den Empfänger bestimmt. Sollten Sie nicht der
> bestimmungsgemäße Empfänger sein, ist Ihnen jegliche Offenlegung,
> Vervielfältigung, Weitergabe oder Nutzung des Inhalts untersagt. Bitte
> informieren Sie in diesem Fall unverzüglich den Absender und löschen Sie
> die E-Mail (einschließlich etwaiger beigefügter Dateien) von Ihrem System.
> Vielen Dank.
>
> The contents of this e-mail (including any attachments) are confidential
> and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient of
> this e-mail, any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of its contents
> is strictly prohibited, and you should please notify the sender immediately
> and then delete it (including any attachments) from your system. Thank you.
>
> 
> Von: Rohit Yadav 
> Gesendet: Thursday, February 24, 2022 3:56:56 PM
> An: dev 
> Cc: Andrija Panic 
> Betreff: Re: [Discussion] CentOS 7 KVM binaries
>
> +1 I've seen a lot of users and some of our customers use qemu-kvm-ev in
> production. However, we need to check if qemu-kvm-ev has 100% feature
> parity (I remember my colleague Andrija suggesting something which was
> missing in either stock qemu-kvm or qemu-kvm-ev).
>
>
> Regards.
>
> 
> From: Slavka Peleva 
> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2022 23:58
> To: dev 
> Subject: Re: [Discussion] CentOS 7 KVM binaries
>
> Hi Daniel,
>
> +1 for qemu-kvm-ev. We also advise our customers to use it.
>
> Best regards,
> Slavka
>
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 8:51 PM Simon Weller 
> wrote:
>
> > Daniel,
> >
> > We've used qemu-kvm-ev in production for years. A number of the
> > enhancements we've pushed into Cloudstack have required it. I think
> you'll
> > find that most cloud providers based on Centos (or Alma/Rocky) are also
> > using it.
> >
> > -Si
> > 
> > From: Daniel Salvador 
> > Sent: Friday, February 18, 2022 9:53 AM
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org 
> > Subject: [Discussion] CentOS 7 KVM binaries
> >
> > Hi all, hope you are doing fine.
> >
> > The following discussion emerged from PR #5297[¹].
> >
> > It is a 

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.16.1.0 (RC2)

[Rohit Yadav]

2cents;

I suppose it's up to the RM to triage and if necessary cut RC3, however, if a 
normal user account can't have the list of resources (uuid, in this case 
network's UUID) then it doesn't appear a critical issue to me for 99.99% cases.

Long term - it may be worth doing a broad search for all APIs where a similar 
behaviour may exist (user can't list the resource, but if they knew the UUID 
could possible run an API against that).



Regards.


From: Andrija Panic 
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 04:36
To: dev 
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.16.1.0 (RC2)

By all means, although we could argue that this is NOT a regression, and as
such we might skip it - but it's a security/privacy issue, so we should
better fix it in RC3, yes.


 

On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 at 16:15, Gabriel Bräscher  wrote:

> Hello folks,
>
> I would like to raise the issue
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/6049.
> It affects not only 4.16.1.0 RC2, but also previous releases.
> I consider it a critical issue, which could potentially impact the need for
> a release candidate #3.
> Any thoughts?
>
> Regards,
> Gabriel.
>
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 3:46 PM Nux!  wrote:
>
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > Tested KVM in advanced zones (with and without security groups).
> > Everything seems to be working.
> >
> > ---
> > Nux!
> > www.nux.ro
> >
> > On 2022-02-25 15:08, Suresh Anaparti wrote:
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > I have created a 4.16.1.0 release (RC2), with the following artifacts
> > > up for testing and a vote:
> > >
> > > Git Branch and Commit SHA:
> > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/tree/4.16.1.0-RC20220225T1901
> > > Commit: cad9332082a1f85eedc30cf547ae28224be170c2
> > >
> > > Source release (checksums and signatures are available at the same
> > > location):
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/cloudstack/4.16.1.0/
> > >
> > > PGP release keys (signed using
> > > D6E0581ECF8A2FBE3FF6B3C9D7CEAE3A9E71D0AA):
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/cloudstack/KEYS
> > >
> > > The vote will be open until 2nd March 2022.
> > >
> > > For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to
> > > indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
> > >
> > > [ ] +1  approve
> > > [ ] +0  no opinion
> > > [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
> > >
> > > For users convenience, the packages from this release candidate (RC2)
> > > and
> > > 4.16.1 systemvm templates are available here:
> > > https://download.cloudstack.org/testing/4.16.1.0-RC2/
> > > https://download.cloudstack.org/systemvm/4.16/
> > >
> > > Documentation is not published yet, but the following may be
> > > referenced for upgrade related tests:
> > > (there's a new 4.16.1 systemvm template to be registered prior to
> > > upgrade)
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation/tree/4.16/source/upgrading/upgrade
> > >
> > > NOTES on the issues fixed in this RC2 release:
> > >
> > > (these do *NOT* require a full retest if you were testing RC1 already -
> > > just if you were affected by these issues):
> > > - https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/6017 (regression in
> > > register template form
> > > when select/unselect check boxes using space in keyboard)
> > > - https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/6026 (affects volumes on
> > > managed storages when
> > > stopping or migrating a VM)
> > > - https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/6038 (regression in SSVM
> > > scaling down behavior,
> > > new config 'secstorage.vm.auto.scale.down' added to control scaling
> > > down)
> > >
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Suresh
> >
>


--

Andrija Panić