Hi,
I have identified test cases for Multiple IP Ranges support in cloudstack and
the test plan is @
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Multiple+IP+Ranges+support
Please review and let me know your feedback.
Reference FS:
commit d13c18516a30d035e2251d187979e805670aab81
Author: Prasanna Santhanam t...@apache.org
Date: Fri Mar 29 13:25:20 2013 +0530
CLOUDSTACK-1841: Missing `cloud`.`configuration` stmts in upgrade
Following global configurations introduced b/w 3.0.2 and 4.1 were
missed.
On 29 March 2013 12:49, Maurice Lawler maurice.law...@me.com wrote:
Hello Gang,
I was wondering short of rendering this with the API. Is there plans to allow
end users on the CS UI to be permitted to easily change their login password ?
I noticed at this time I (being the admin) can change
Taking time off, will check ML if possible and work on few blockers. From
now onwards, I would only be able to work on ACS in my free time.
Pl. email me on bhais...@baagi.org for something urgent.
I'll be only following dev ML from now.
Cheers.
Please find the surefire report
https://www.dropbox.com/s/vyq610sdqzs7pt9/surefire-reports.zip
As discussed, I will create a new node for master-nonoss build in Jenkins.cs.o
once I am free.
Thanks,
Pradeep S
-Original Message-
From: prasanna [mailto:srivatsav.prasa...@gmail.com] On
On Mar 29, 2013, at 2:27 AM, Prasanna Santhanam t...@apache.org wrote:
Here's the latest Blockers and criticals (UTC +0530, Mar 29)
Blocker:
CLOUDSTACK-1746
Cloudstack Usage Server won't start
Kishan KavalaFrancois Gaudreault
CLOUDSTACK-1836
License header failures for ja-JP
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/9870/
---
(Updated March 29, 2013, 9:50 a.m.)
Review request for cloudstack, Rajesh
On 29 March 2013 15:16, Sebastien Goasguen run...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mar 29, 2013, at 2:27 AM, Prasanna Santhanam t...@apache.org wrote:
Here's the latest Blockers and criticals (UTC +0530, Mar 29)
Blocker:
CLOUDSTACK-1746
Cloudstack Usage Server won't start
Kishan KavalaFrancois
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/9870/#review18502
---
Ship it!
Branch: refs/heads/master
Commit:
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 11:57:17AM +0530, Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
Here's the latest Blockers and criticals (UTC +0530, Mar 29)
CLOUDSTACK-1841
ASF 4.0 to 4.1 Upgrade: Missing Few Global Configuration parameters on the
Upgraded Setup
Unassigned Chandan Purushothama
Sent a patch
(2013/03/28 20:38), Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
I fixed those on transifex. Please feel free to tell me if you still
have trouble in building ja-JP docs. :-)
thanks, I pulled all new translations. I am not sure what you did in transifex
but it did not fix the issue :)
-snip-
There was an
commit 48311363d600264cb3542992a615706cb92f90ad
Author: Murali Reddy murali.re...@citrix.com
Date: Fri Mar 29 15:53:21 2013 +0530
CLOUDSTACK-1834: Events are not generated for registerUserKeys(),
Enabling account and Editing account.
On Mar 29, 2013, at 6:25 AM, Hiroaki KAWAI ka...@stratosphere.co.jp wrote:
(2013/03/28 20:38), Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
I fixed those on transifex. Please feel free to tell me if you still
have trouble in building ja-JP docs. :-)
thanks, I pulled all new translations. I am not sure what
On Mar 29, 2013, at 5:55 AM, prasanna t...@apache.org wrote:
On 29 March 2013 15:16, Sebastien Goasguen run...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mar 29, 2013, at 2:27 AM, Prasanna Santhanam t...@apache.org wrote:
Here's the latest Blockers and criticals (UTC +0530, Mar 29)
Blocker:
CLOUDSTACK-1746
9946Referenced bug is fixed Pradeep
Update the patch with commit details and mark the patch as submitted
This patch has not been applied. I have sent the request once again with the
latest diff to apply it.
Thanks,
Pradeep S
-Original
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 06:30:50AM -0400, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
On Mar 29, 2013, at 5:55 AM, prasanna t...@apache.org wrote:
On 29 March 2013 15:16, Sebastien Goasguen run...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mar 29, 2013, at 2:27 AM, Prasanna Santhanam t...@apache.org wrote:
Here's the
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/10040/#review18503
---
server/src/com/cloud/network/NetworkServiceImpl.java
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/9541/#review18504
---
Commit 95fce112157526b0727821e145ec53d0e8f3e824 in branch
On Mar 29, 2013, at 6:57 AM, Prasanna Santhanam t...@apache.org wrote:
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 06:30:50AM -0400, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
On Mar 29, 2013, at 5:55 AM, prasanna t...@apache.org wrote:
On 29 March 2013 15:16, Sebastien Goasguen run...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mar 29, 2013, at
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/9946/#review18505
---
Commit fa47d30866f17201a74ec145c96c9bd79b022887 in branch
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/9946/#review18506
---
Commit 5a66ec35ad08ff3313e72b54eba7e1754868eee4 in branch
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/9946/#review18507
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Hugo Trippaers
On March 29, 2013, 10:41
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 10:43:12AM +, Pradeep Soundararajan wrote:
9946 Referenced bug is fixed Pradeep
Update the
patch with commit details and mark the patch as submitted
This patch has not been applied. I have sent the request once again
with
Hi,
I'm hitting couple of jenkins bugs [1][2] on my build jobs.
Jenkins.cs.o will be upgraded.
[1] https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-13972
[2] https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-17337
Thanks,
--
Prasanna.,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/9541/#review18509
---
Commit 95fce112157526b0727821e145ec53d0e8f3e824 in branch
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 05:07:23PM +0530, Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 04:54:02PM +0530, Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
Hi,
I'm hitting couple of jenkins bugs [1][2] on my build jobs.
Jenkins.cs.o will be upgraded.
[1]
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/9789/#review18512
---
Ship it!
Branch: refs/heads/master
Commit:
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 04:05:02PM +0300, Serge A. Salamanka wrote:
Dear all,
There is a need to create a new type of system VM that will provide a
grid-service for a Zone.
Can you explain a little more about what you are trying to accomplish?
What do you mean by grid-service, and why does
On 29.03.2013 16:27, Chip Childers wrote:
Can you explain a little more about what you are trying to accomplish?
What do you mean by grid-service, and why does it need to be a system
vm?
For guest VMs in a Zone I'm trying to provide a specific service (that
doesn't have to be a Grid service,
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 05:40:31AM +, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
On March 15, 2013, 1:59 p.m., Chip Childers wrote:
also, what's the bug ID?
I updated the BUG ID. Chip looking at JIRA you have already committed it.
Kelven can you mark the patch as submitted?
- Animesh
I just
Shouldn't be. But not sure, will take a look shortly.
--
Prasanna.,
- Original Message -
From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2013 09:24 PM
To: CloudStack Dev dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [CI] Upgrading Jenkins
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at
The repo was pointed wrong. Fixed now.
On 29 March 2013 19:52, Prasanna Santhanam prasanna.santha...@citrix.comwrote:
Shouldn't be. But not sure, will take a look shortly.
--
Prasanna.,
- Original Message -
From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
Sent: Friday,
Sounds great, thanks Hugo!
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 8:47 PM, Hugo Trippaers
htrippa...@schubergphilis.com wrote:
Hey Dave,
My ship it is waiting for a last compile and test run on my dev
platform. I'll try to do that over the weekend.
Cheers,
Hugo
Sent from my iPhone
On 29 mrt.
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/10196/
---
Review request for cloudstack, Abhinandan Prateek, edison su, Alex Huang, and
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 06:12:14PM +0530, Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 01:29:33PM +0530, Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
commit d13c18516a30d035e2251d187979e805670aab81
Author: Prasanna Santhanam t...@apache.org
Date: Fri Mar 29 13:25:20 2013 +0530
CLOUDSTACK-1841:
I have put the feature proposed [1] and developed in the feature branch [2] up
for review. Code for this feature conforms to what was proposed in FS [3]. The
patch available at [4]. It includes marvin tests and unit tests for verifying
the functionality. Please take a look at it and let me know
I have made the UI changes to support zone wide primary storage only for KVM
as the hypervisor . For all other hypervisors , we 'll have cluster wide
primary storage as the default option . The fix has been pushed to asf/master.
Thanks,
Pranav
-Original Message-
From: Nitin Mehta
Want to check if anyone is interested to pick these up today
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-1842
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-1848
thanks
/sudha
Below are today's ( 3/29 ) defects. Upgrade is in progress - ~ 60% done.
Couple of defects are not picked up - sent mail separately if anyone is
interested to pick them up.
Rohit mentioned that he would be offline so 1839 need to be picked up as well.
I will keep it in unassigned state so
Hi,
Can someone answer these questions for me?
Is there a max number of clusters CS supports? If so, what is that number?
Is there a max number of primary storages CS supports? If so, what is that
number?
Thanks!
--
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e:
CLOUDSTACK-1827: patch is already in MASTER, patch request for 4.1
sent to mailing list.
CLOUDSTACK-1755: Fix version is 4.2, we didn't plan to fix it in 4.1
and it's not a release blocker as we agreed.
--Sheng
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Sudha Ponnaganti
sudha.ponnaga...@citrix.com wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/10039/#review18519
---
On 3/29/13 6:36 AM, Serge A. Salamanka salsa-...@tut.by wrote:
On 29.03.2013 16:27, Chip Childers wrote:
Can you explain a little more about what you are trying to accomplish?
What do you mean by grid-service, and why does it need to be a system
vm?
For guest VMs in a Zone I'm trying to
Thanks, Chiradeep
Are you aware of any documentation we have with regards to scalability? A
customer asked for such a doc today.
I found this one:
http://www.citrix.co.jp/event/pdf/5-scalability.pdf
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com wrote:
No
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/9871/#review18531
---
I do think an explicit migration interface on NetworkElement is the
Xen? KVM?
Generally GetDomRVersionCmd failing is only a symptom, it usually
means that cloudstack was never able to communicate with the system
vm. You would need to look at whether the VM actually started on the
host, and some of the text around when the VM was deployed to get any
meaningful
Besides the items that Chiradeep mentioned, there would be limits on
Management Server Scalability. This can be easily overcome by deploying
multiple management servers front-ended by a LB. Since all of the
management servers are stateless, this should not cause any problems.
Regards,
Manan Shah
I would think that an ACL container is associated with a VPC and not with
multiple VPCs.
You could create an ACL container that makes sense for VPC #1 but not for
VPC #2. If you update the container for VPC #1 you might unwittingly make
a dangerous change in VPC #2.
Also, isn't the term
This depends on the changes proposed in the ACL deny rules feature. Can
you re-word taking into account the new proposed APIs?
On 3/28/13 12:46 AM, Abhinandan Prateek abhinandan.prat...@citrix.com
wrote:
+1, thanks for proposing and working on this feature.
On 28/03/13 11:32 AM, Jayapal Reddy
Bump...
--Sheng
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 3:55 PM, Sheng Yang sh...@yasker.org wrote:
commit e3f67d126d66c31e027c96b5524667884084053b
Author: Sheng Yang sheng.y...@citrix.com
Date: Thu Mar 28 15:02:45 2013 -0700
CLOUDSTACK-1827: Fix redundant router update mechanism
There is a bug
Thanks for this.
It seems a reasonable approach, except that it reflects a failure of
previous modeling of the private gateway feature.
So, today we want to provide source nat,
Tomorrow perhaps static NAT?
The day after PF and LB ?
The difference between the public network and the private
Sorry for missing it. Will test and push in about an hour.
On Mar 29, 2013, at 6:30 PM, Sheng Yang sh...@yasker.org wrote:
Bump...
--Sheng
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 3:55 PM, Sheng Yang sh...@yasker.org wrote:
commit e3f67d126d66c31e027c96b5524667884084053b
Author: Sheng Yang
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/10039/#review18548
---
client/tomcatconf/componentContext.xml.in
Hi all,
I am trying to review some feature branches, when I see merge requests
coming from mailing list, one thing that makes code review almost unrealistic
is that, developers tend to use git merge to master branch whenever rebase is
needed. I don't know other people really do review
I apologize for jumping into this conversation late, but I am new to the
developer mailing list. Why would we choose SHA256+salt over SHA512+salt?
SHA512+salt's storage is insignificant when compared to SHA256 and the chances
of a birthday attack are significantly reduced. As a security
Understandable that SHA256 is good for today but SHA512 is good for tomorrow
and has excellent support in all major languages, products, etc. Oracle is the
only thing I can think of that doesn't support it out of the box.
I agree on balance but I can certainly spare the 32 bytes of storage. :)
Gentle Reminder..
-- Forwarded message --
From: Nick Burch n...@apache.orgmailto:n...@apache.org
Date: Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 11:21 AM
Subject: Upcoming BarCamps
To: committ...@apache.orgmailto:committ...@apache.org
Hi All
Firstly, a couple of upcoming BarCamps for your diary:
My company is building a private cloud and we are moving to cloudstack. As
we begun investigating the cloudmonkey CLI we found that the output was
slightly hard to read. I have begun working on some optimizations that I
think will benefit the community and I reached out to Rohit, who
recommended
No limitations at the mgt server side.
Sent from my Windows Phone
From: Mike Tutkowskimailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
Sent: 3/29/2013 9:56 AM
To:
cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.orgmailto:cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Scalability Limitations
On 30 March 2013 09:20, Justin Grudzien grudz...@gmail.com wrote:
My company is building a private cloud and we are moving to cloudstack. As
we begun investigating the cloudmonkey CLI we found that the output was
slightly hard to read. I have begun working on some optimizations that I
think
60 matches
Mail list logo
