Github user devdeep commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/351#issuecomment-122773398
I'll take a look and get back if I have any queries
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well.
See http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/job/build-master-slowbuild/1855/
--
Started by timer
[EnvInject] - Loading node environment variables.
Building remotely on coohq-slave-01 (cloudstack-buildslave-centos6
systemvmbuilder) in workspace
GitHub user koushik-das opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/607
CLOUDSTACK-8651: [Browser Based Upload Template] Partially uploaded tâ¦
â¦emplates doesn't get cleaned up after the SSVM handling it is destroyed
Fixed template sync code to
GitHub user wido opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/606
CLOUDSTACK-8648: Do not configure the ImageFormat Processor when fetcâ¦
â¦hing filesize
It will throw an exception and that's needed.
Also, make the log show about which file we
See http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/job/build-master-jdk18/220/changes
Changes:
[sanjeev] CLOUDSTACK-8632: Unable to revert snapshot on XenServer
[sanjeev] CLOUDSTACK-8632: Unable to revert snapshot on XenServer
[sanjeev] CLOUDSTACK-8636: Verify failure of creation of Custom disk offering
with
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/595
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is
Github user koushik-das commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/607#issuecomment-122836717
Test browser based incomplete template upload, followed by SSVM destroy.
Template should go to UploadAbandoned state and get cleaned up. ... ===
TestName:
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/590
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is
See http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/job/build-master-noredist/4425/
--
Started by an SCM change
[EnvInject] - Loading node environment variables.
Building remotely on coohq-slave-01 (cloudstack-buildslave-centos6
systemvmbuilder) in workspace
See http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/job/build-master-noredist/4426/changes
LS,
In coverity the only remaining high impact issues are concerned with
upgrade code. Some of it is in 4.3 and 4.5 code but most in pre-4
upgrades.
I addressed the file Upgrade218to22.java in a PR [1] and I move that
we don't pull it but instead drop the file altogether together with
all
GitHub user DaanHoogland opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/608
CLOUDSTACK-8652: remove old upgrade code
driven by coverity reported issues with resource leaks in it
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull
On 20-07-15 13:48, Daan Hoogland wrote:
LS,
In coverity the only remaining high impact issues are concerned with
upgrade code. Some of it is in 4.3 and 4.5 code but most in pre-4
upgrades.
I addressed the file Upgrade218to22.java in a PR [1] and I move that
we don't pull it but instead
Github user wilderrodrigues commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/608#issuecomment-122881299
Excellent, @DaanHoogland!
LGTM :+1:
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as
On 17-07-15 16:50, sebgoa wrote:
On Jul 17, 2015, at 10:53 AM, Wido den Hollander w...@widodh.nl wrote:
Hi,
Issue: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-8640
I encountered this by using the AWS SDK under 4.5 (homebrew).
4.5 uses the 1.3.22 SDK, but master uses 1.9.8 and
GitHub user karuturi opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/609
CLOUDSTACK-8596 ability to query nested groups for Microsoft AD
added a new configuration to select the appropriate ldap implementation
incase of microsoft AD enabled nested querying of
in anticipation of loads of +1's I made a new PR (at [2])
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Wido den Hollander w...@widodh.nl wrote:
On 20-07-15 13:48, Daan Hoogland wrote:
LS,
In coverity the only remaining high impact issues are concerned with
upgrade code. Some of it is in 4.3 and 4.5
Hi,
Please find the latest report on new defect(s) introduced to cloudstack found
with Coverity Scan.
2 new defect(s) introduced to cloudstack found with Coverity Scan.
11 defect(s), reported by Coverity Scan earlier, were marked fixed in the
recent build analyzed by Coverity Scan.
New
Hi Wido,
I’m doing a regression test on it in order to find out when it broke. I started
getting my PR from 27th May, which introduced the big Libvirt refactor. It
works fine… like a charm:
[root@kvm1 ~]# ls -lart ~/.ssh/
total 16
dr-xr-x---. 3 root root 4096 Jul 20 09:35 ..
drwx--. 2 root
GitHub user DaanHoogland opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/610
CLOUDSTACK-7539: coverity regression dead local store
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/DaanHoogland/cloudstack
Github user bhaisaab commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/608#issuecomment-122911947
-1 - this break upgrade-ability for really old cloudstack installations.
There is no *necessity* to remove the code, you can choose to ignore coverity
and other
-1 I disagree and shared some of the reasons on the PR.
We may need to ask on users@ to see if there are any users on 2.x or 3.x to
find if there are any users on these old versions which should be supported
because we can decide to remove 2.x/3.x upgrade paths.
On 20-Jul-2015, at 5:59 pm,
As a user, I'd say +1.
I understand the concerns, but as long as there is a workaround I'm fine
with it.
Would be great though if the upgrade scripts abort if it notices an upgrade
from an unsupported versions.
Erik
Den mandag 20. juli 2015 skrev Daan Hoogland daan.hoogl...@gmail.com
Daan,
While I see the desire to remove outstanding scan issues, doing it at the
expense of a feature required by users is not acceptable to me. My first
question is how many users are still running pre-4.x versions? In its current
state, the commit message lacks an explanation of the
Github user jburwell commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/608#issuecomment-122928905
-1 @DaanHoogland what is the reasoning for removing the old upgrade code
(please amend the commit to explain the reasoning for posterity)? As far as I
know, we
Github user abhinandanprateek commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/608#issuecomment-122915463
I am not sure how severe are the coverity reported issues. If there are
customers who may want to upgrade then it is better to wait before depreciating
Github user karuturi commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/610#issuecomment-123161896
:+1:
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
All,
A recently proposed change [1] to remove older upgrade code has prompted a
wider discussion regarding the policy we should employ regarding upgrade
support. Currently, we have no policy regarding how far back the process will
function. As the system evolves, it is simply unsustainable
28 matches
Mail list logo
