See http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/job/build-master-slowbuild/2184/
--
[...truncated 26372 lines...]
[INFO]
[INFO] --- maven-remote-resources-plugin:1.3:process (default) @
cloud-vmware-base ---
[INFO]
[INFO] --- maven-resources-plugin:2.5:resources
Github user remibergsma commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/761#issuecomment-136099464
@miguelaferreira Thanks. I guess returning `null` is done in many of the
Investigators right now, but would be great to improve it. If we at least could
make it
The job is removed after 10 others are run. Look at
http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/job/build-master-slowbuild
http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/job/build-master-slowbuild/2176/ and go to
the latest job. The issue is reported under new. It boils down to 'new
PrintWriter(System.out)' is perceived as
Github user miguelaferreira commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/761#issuecomment-136095882
@remi: passing null to a method or returning null from a method is always a
bad choose. There are better ways to express I don't know (e.g. Using
See http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/job/build-master-slowbuild/2183/
--
[...truncated 26372 lines...]
[INFO]
[INFO] --- maven-remote-resources-plugin:1.3:process (default) @
cloud-vmware-base ---
[INFO]
[INFO] --- maven-resources-plugin:2.5:resources
Github user DaanHoogland commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/762#issuecomment-136106558
LGTM, reviewing this I finally understand why we have a custom renderer at
all. The travis failing checks are unrelated timeouts.
---
If your project is set
See http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/job/build-master-slowbuild/2187/
--
[...truncated 26372 lines...]
[INFO]
[INFO] --- maven-remote-resources-plugin:1.3:process (default) @
cloud-vmware-base ---
[INFO]
[INFO] --- maven-resources-plugin:2.5:resources
Github user rafaelweingartner commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/762#issuecomment-136132050
Does anyone else have some ideas on how to test that code?
I am not comfortable with the test I coded, the test feels shallow.
---
If your project is
See http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/job/build-master-slowbuild/2186/
--
[...truncated 26372 lines...]
[INFO]
[INFO] --- maven-remote-resources-plugin:1.3:process (default) @
cloud-vmware-base ---
[INFO]
[INFO] --- maven-resources-plugin:2.5:resources
See http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/job/build-master-slowbuild/2185/
--
[...truncated 26372 lines...]
[INFO]
[INFO] --- maven-remote-resources-plugin:1.3:process (default) @
cloud-vmware-base ---
[INFO]
[INFO] --- maven-resources-plugin:2.5:resources
See http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/job/build-master-slowbuild/2188/
--
[...truncated 26372 lines...]
[INFO]
[INFO] --- maven-remote-resources-plugin:1.3:process (default) @
cloud-vmware-base ---
[INFO]
[INFO] --- maven-resources-plugin:2.5:resources
Hi, sorry for replying late since weekend.
Snthosh, this patch works for me and thanks.
It modified like this:
29c29,32
self.params.append(key + '=' + urllib.quote_plus(args[key]))
---
if key == startdate or key == enddate:
self.params.append(key +
See http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/job/build-master-slowbuild/2189/
--
[...truncated 26372 lines...]
[INFO]
[INFO] --- maven-remote-resources-plugin:1.3:process (default) @
cloud-vmware-base ---
[INFO]
[INFO] --- maven-resources-plugin:2.5:resources
Github user karuturi commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/714#issuecomment-136274140
jenkins noredist build failed with the below error. Reverting this PR
```
[ERROR] Failed to execute goal
See http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/job/build-master-slowbuild/2190/
--
[...truncated 26372 lines...]
[INFO]
[INFO] --- maven-remote-resources-plugin:1.3:process (default) @
cloud-vmware-base ---
[INFO]
[INFO] --- maven-resources-plugin:2.5:resources
Github user bhaisaab commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/754#issuecomment-136265583
@miguelaferreira I'm not sure, but this seems environment specific; travis
is green and build also work in my environment; are you still able to reproduce.
Github user karuturi commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/755#issuecomment-136249877
Can someone review please?
---
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
I am no longer able to start MS after this. I did a clean build followed by
starting MS. Did travis pass for it? Should we revert?
mvn clean install -Dsimulator -DskipTests
mvn -pl client jetty:run -Dsimulator
Getting the following error. No qualifying bean of type
Github user kansal commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/685#issuecomment-136250704
@DaanHoogland Yes the first test in a way does the same thing only. The
thing is that the second test is more intuitive in a way that it firsts
registers a key-pair
I would say, yeah, revert it. Daan and I did a visual walk through of the
code, but I don't think either of us did a build and tried to run it. I
thought the tests said they were good on Travis, though.
On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 10:57 PM, Koushik Das koushik@citrix.com
wrote:
I am no longer
Github user bhaisaab commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/751#issuecomment-136264200
@remibergsma @karuturi @abhinandanprateek @jburwell @DaanHoogland
@miguelaferreira review please? (same as #750)
---
If your project is set up for it, you can
In fact, the JIRA ticket is listed as Minor. At this point in 4.6, I
don't think we want to merge in code for tickets listed as Minor.
Perhaps Remi can confirm or deny that.
On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 11:03 PM, Mike Tutkowski
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com wrote:
I would say, yeah, revert it. Daan
I say we revert so the 4.6 testing can continue and then work on fixing why
this broke the build. No hard feelings, we simply need master to build.
If someone can revert, please do. I can do it in about two hours.
Sent from my iPhone
On 31 Aug 2015, at 06:58, Koushik Das
I am doing a build with revert locally. Will revert once done.
~Rajani
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Remi Bergsma rberg...@schubergphilis.com
wrote:
I say we revert so the 4.6 testing can continue and then work on fixing
why this broke the build. No hard feelings, we simply need master to
24 matches
Mail list logo
