[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...

[swill]

Github user swill commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1442#issuecomment-197496018
  
We are actively discussing the role it will play on the dev list.  We are 
currently exploring our options for potentially using it for CI and distributed 
integration testing since apache is not giving us any way to do this with the 
current repository.

You can get more information on the types of problems we are trying to 
solve here:  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-11429


---
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 enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: findbugs: new found old instance of DM_DE...

[pvr9711]

Github user pvr9711 commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1427#issuecomment-198490086
  
LGTM
Ran BVT  with XS 6.5  - all the test passed with the exception of the 
following tests due to env issues:
test_01_create_volume - ssh issue.  
test_07_list_default_iso - iso didn't exist.  
test_01_test_vm_volume_snapshot - test case issue - operation is not 
allowed?


---
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 enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Fixed issues with test_vpc_vpn script

[sanju1010]

Github user sanju1010 commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1156#issuecomment-197701355
  
@swill, PR #1276 outdated this PR. So closing this.


---
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 enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

AW: [POLL] Interest for EU based event/collab

[Walter , André]

Hi to all,

sorry, but we already booked the event location and this would be difficult. 
But I see no big conflict, why we have to do so.

Best regards.
Andre

Von: Pierre-Luc Dion [mailto:pd...@cloudops.com]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 17. März 2016 03:24
An: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: Giles Sirett; Steve Roles; Walter, André
Betreff: Re: [POLL] Interest for EU based event/collab


Hi guys, we've been quiet lately, but we want to organize a collab event in 
Canada, our target dates are June 2 and 3. We just cleared some questionning 
regarding the planning and now ready to go forward.

Could an european one be postpone?

Il start a new thread in the mailing list...
On Mar 16, 2016 3:58 PM, "Erik Weber" 
> wrote:
I appreciate the offer but plan on spending the days dipping in a pool 
somewhere in Greece at that time.
However, I do hope that the event is successful, and that there might become a 
wish for a later event (Winter? b).
That is still far ahead and something we can pick up later though.

--
Erik


On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 8:54 PM, Walter, André 
> wrote:
Hi Erik,

we are heading for 16th of June from 13:00 -17:30 CET (I am working together 
with Steve to finalize the speakers/agenda) and you are more than welcome ☺.

Best regards.
Andre

Von: Erik Weber [mailto:terbol...@gmail.com]
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 16. März 2016 20:51
An: Giles Sirett
Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Walter, André; 
Steve Roles
Betreff: Re: [POLL] Interest for EU based event/collab

Hi Giles,
Berlin is great!
Has there been any discussions about a specific date yet? Personally I have 
some vacation plans in that time frame (not that it should matter for the 
event).
I agree that combing the efforts we have is a good thing, I am hoping for 
something bigger than a traditional UG at some point as it is hard to defend 
the costs for a 3-4 hour event.

--
Erik


On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 4:22 PM, Giles Sirett 
> wrote:
Erik

I've responded to your survey (don’t know how useful my response will be, I've 
said "yes" to everything)


One idea: we have a quarterly meeting of the Cloudstack EU UG.
We got 50 along to the last one. It’s a different audience to the usual CCC 
attendees (more users than devs)

For the next one (early June), we're planning on having it in Berlin

Andre and the folks from BitGroup are taking the lead on it

It would seem perfectly logical to me to combine anything we (i.e. the 
community) do with one of these UG's - gain more critical mass more quickly and 
make it more attractive to potential sponsors

I'm not sure how far down the path Andre et al are with logistics and whether 
the idea of making this into a bigger thing would scare him, but it may be 
worth you two syncing on this

We only have these meetings quarterly, the one after June would clash with 
Brasil so likely not to happen



Kind Regards
Giles



Giles Sirett

CEO

, 

ShapeBlue



d: 

+44  20 3603 0541 | s: +44 203 603 0540

 | 

m: 

+44 7961112055


e: 

giles.sir...@shapeblue.com | t: 

 | 

w: 

www.shapeblue.com


a: 

53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden London WC2N 4HS UK







Shape Blue Ltd is a company incorporated in England & Wales. ShapeBlue Services 
India LLP is a company incorporated in India and is operated under license from 
Shape Blue Ltd. Shape Blue Brasil Consultoria Ltda is a company incorporated in 
Brasil and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue SA Pty Ltd 
is a company registered by The Republic of South Africa and is traded under 
license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is a registered trademark.
This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended 
solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or 
opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily 
represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or related companies. If you are not the 
intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based upon 
its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you 
believe you have received this email in error.


 
-Original Message-
From: Erik Weber [mailto:terbol...@gmail.com]
Sent: 16 March 2016 13:20
To: dev ; us...@cloudstack.apache.org

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9297 - Reworked logic in Stora...

[rafaelweingartner]

Github user rafaelweingartner commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1441#issuecomment-197992182
  
got it @mike-tutkowski


---
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 enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9142 Migrate VM changes xmlDes...

[swill]

Github user swill commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1348#issuecomment-197555778
  
It looks like @davidamorimfaria is using this in production now without 
issue, so that is a good sign.

@remibergsma do the tests that were previously failing now pass?

Thanks...


---
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 enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Re: github organisation cloudstack

[Erik Weber]

On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 8:46 PM, Will Stevens  wrote:

> If we use this I think it's main purpose should be to facilitate CI and
> integration testing of the apache/cloudstack repo.
>
> The first hurdle in using this repo for CI work is the fact that none of
> the open PRs from apache/cloudstack are available in the
> cloudstack/cloudstack repo.



I'd say we tackle that problem once we have a working and bulletproof CI.
In the meantime we can either make dummy PRs or copy some from the ASF org
to run in the CI.

As long as we have concensus, I would imagine that we could ask
contributors to send PRs here instead when the time comes?

-- 
Erik

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9003 Make VirtualMachineName i...

[ProjectMoon]

Github user ProjectMoon commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/988#issuecomment-198274020
  
Closing this as we have finally finished our "real" implementation of this, 
though it's far beyond the scope of this PR. At some point in the near future 
we will submit a PR with a full refactoring of how resources are named.


---
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 enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-8800 : Improved the listVirtua...

[rafaelweingartner]

Github user rafaelweingartner commented on a diff in the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/780#discussion_r56509815
  
--- Diff: 
plugins/hypervisors/vmware/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/vmware/resource/VmwareResource.java
 ---
@@ -4879,10 +4889,16 @@ private VirtualMachineGuestOsIdentifier 
translateGuestOsIdentifier(String cpuArc
 } else if 
(objProp.getName().contains(instanceNameCustomField)) {
--- End diff --

Here it is the same as in CitrixResourceBase.java. I know you just followed 
the way the code was written here before, but this “if/else/if/else……” 
structure is too big; I believe to introduce some changes like this here; it 
would be much appreciated a refactoring. I do not mean a huge refactoring, only 
the extraction of this if/else structure to a method and then using some other 
clever way to do these checks and to retrieve the values. 


---
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 enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Re: [IMPORTANT] Huge Github PR Backlog

[Will Stevens]

I am trying to work through this. Hopefully I can get my CI setup for next
week and start getting through the backlog. Any assistance testing will be
appreciated.

Also, any fixes to marvin tests will take priority of any other PRs.
On Mar 17, 2016 5:06 PM, "ilya"  wrote:

> Hi Folks,
>
> What can we do about PR backlog in GitHub? As we all know, it will be
> very difficult to merge the changes - as things will get out of sync.
>
> Feedback is welcome,
>
> Thanks,
> ilya
>

Re: [POLL] Interest for EU based event/collab

[Erik Weber]

I appreciate the offer but plan on spending the days dipping in a pool
somewhere in Greece at that time.

However, I do hope that the event is successful, and that there might
become a wish for a later event (Winter? b).
That is still far ahead and something we can pick up later though.

-- 
Erik



On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 8:54 PM, Walter, André 
wrote:

> Hi Erik,
>
>
>
> we are heading for 16th of June from 13:00 -17:30 CET (I am working
> together with Steve to finalize the speakers/agenda) and you are more than
> welcome J.
>
>
>
> Best regards.
> Andre
>
>
>
> *Von:* Erik Weber [mailto:terbol...@gmail.com]
> *Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 16. März 2016 20:51
> *An:* Giles Sirett
> *Cc:* dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Walter, André; Steve Roles
> *Betreff:* Re: [POLL] Interest for EU based event/collab
>
>
>
> Hi Giles,
>
> Berlin is great!
>
> Has there been any discussions about a specific date yet? Personally I
> have some vacation plans in that time frame (not that it should matter for
> the event).
>
> I agree that combing the efforts we have is a good thing, I am hoping for
> something bigger than a traditional UG at some point as it is hard to
> defend the costs for a 3-4 hour event.
>
> --
>
> Erik
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 4:22 PM, Giles Sirett 
> wrote:
>
> Erik
>
> I've responded to your survey (don’t know how useful my response will be,
> I've said "yes" to everything)
>
>
> One idea: we have a quarterly meeting of the Cloudstack EU UG.
> We got 50 along to the last one. It’s a different audience to the usual
> CCC attendees (more users than devs)
>
> For the next one (early June), we're planning on having it in Berlin
>
> Andre and the folks from BitGroup are taking the lead on it
>
> It would seem perfectly logical to me to combine anything we (i.e. the
> community) do with one of these UG's - gain more critical mass more quickly
> and make it more attractive to potential sponsors
>
> I'm not sure how far down the path Andre et al are with logistics and
> whether the idea of making this into a bigger thing would scare him, but it
> may be worth you two syncing on this
>
> We only have these meetings quarterly, the one after June would clash with
> Brasil so likely not to happen
>
>
>
> Kind Regards
> Giles
>
>
>
> [image: ShapeBlue] 
>
> *Giles Sirett*
>
> *CEO*
>
> *, *
>
> *ShapeBlue*
>
> *d: *
>
> *+44  20 3603 0541 | s: +44 203 603 0540*
> <+44%20%2020%203603%200541%20%7C%20s:%20+44%20203%20603%200540>
>
>  |
>
> *m: *
>
> *+44 7961112055* <+44%207961112055>
>
> *e: *
>
> *giles.sir...@shapeblue.com | t: * 
>
>  |
>
> *w: *
>
> *www.shapeblue.com* 
>
> *a: *
>
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden London WC2N 4HS UK
>
> Shape Blue Ltd is a company incorporated in England & Wales. ShapeBlue
> Services India LLP is a company incorporated in India and is operated under
> license from Shape Blue Ltd. Shape Blue Brasil Consultoria Ltda is a
> company incorporated in Brasil and is operated under license from Shape
> Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue SA Pty Ltd is a company registered by The Republic of
> South Africa and is traded under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is
> a registered trademark.
> This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended
> solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or
> opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
> represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or related companies. If you are not the
> intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based
> upon its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender
> if you believe you have received this email in error.
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Erik Weber [mailto:terbol...@gmail.com]
> Sent: 16 March 2016 13:20
> To: dev ; us...@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: [POLL] Interest for EU based event/collab
>
> [Cross posted to users@ and dev@]
>
> As you may be aware, a conference has been announced in Brazil later this
> year.
>
> I guess there are more than me having a hard time travelling that far and
> long, so I would like to check the interest for an EU based event.
>
> Unless someone comes up with a big money jar it won't be as fancy as the
> previous ones.
>
> If you could fill out this poll[1] and/or respond to this email, that
> would be great.
>
> [1] https://no.surveymonkey.com/r/CX3K5T3
>
>
> --
> Erik
>
> Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services:
> IaaS Cloud Design & Build
>  | CSForge – rapid
> IaaS deployment framework 
> CloudStack Consulting  | 
> CloudStack
> Software Engineering
> 
> CloudStack 

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

[Will Stevens]

Please be advised this conversation is continuing in a thread titled: Re:
External fork of Cloudstack

Mailing list link:
http://markmail.org/message/53ct2mma4x4jm6s2?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Re:+External+fork+of+Cloudstack

Please come join the conversation in that thread...

*Will STEVENS*
Lead Developer

*CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Paul Angus 
wrote:

> +1 Sounds like a plan.
>
>
>
> Paul Angus
> VP Technology   ,   ShapeBlue
>
>
> t:  @cloudyangus
>
> e:  paul.an...@shapeblue.com
> |  w:  www.shapeblue.com
>
>
>
>
>
> From: John Burwell [mailto:john.burw...@shapeblue.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 18, 2016 1:32 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull
> request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)
>
> All,
>
> +1 to Will’s proposal/approach. All we are really talking about is
> rehoming the apache/cloudstack repository mirror to cloudstack/cloudstack.
> The canonical repository would remain the official Apache git repository
> hosted on Apache owned hardware. Therefore, we would maintain our current
> PR merge process [1] that merges the PR branch locally and pushes it to the
> Apache git repository. If re-home the Github mirror, I think it should
> remain read-only mirror where we have the ability to grant privileges to
> our CI system to close PRs.
>
> I would also add that currently, the cloudstack organization is owned by
> individuals who happen to be Apache CloudStack PMC members and committers.
> In my opinion, in order for it to work in the long term, we would need a
> governance policy that transferred ownership to our PMC or Apache Infra.
> Our interest is not the create a fork, but provide our community with the
> ability to exploit an extremely powerful tool for collaboration and source
> management.
>
> Finally, I believing having a dedicated cloudstack Github organization may
> be a means to expand the community. Currently, we have no place to easily
> host subprojects (e.g. cloudmonkey, marvin, etc). With a dedicated
> organization, we could consider inviting other complementary projects such
> configuration management recipes/playbooks and language clients to place
> their repos in the cloudstack organization. For users, they would have a
> central, community sponsored place to find all things cloudstack and we
> further improve our collaboration with the authors/maintainers of these
> projects.
>
> In short, I think Will lays out the approach very clearly. There is **no**
> intention or action to fork Apache CloudStack. Instead, we simply want to
> re-home apache/cloudstack repository mirror to cloudstack/cloudstack
> without changing any other processes. Most importantly, this change can be
> made without compromising the provenance of the codebase because, as we do
> today, commits would only occur on the Apache git repo.
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
> [1]:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=61311655
>
> >
>
> [ShapeBlue]
>
> John Burwell
>
> ShapeBlue
>
>
> d:
>
> +44 (20) 3603 0542 | s: +1 (571) 403-2411
> 
>
>
> e:
>
> john.burw...@shapeblue.com | t:  %20|%20t:>
>
>  |
>
> w:
>
> www.shapeblue.com
>
>
> a:
>
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden London WC2N 4HS UK
>
>
>
> [cid:image6929de.png@d359d3b7.49a57074]
>
>
>
> Shape Blue Ltd is a company incorporated in England & Wales. ShapeBlue
> Services India LLP is a company incorporated in India and is operated under
> license from Shape Blue Ltd. Shape Blue Brasil Consultoria Ltda is a
> company incorporated in Brasil and is operated under license from Shape
> Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue SA Pty Ltd is a company registered by The Republic of
> South Africa and is traded under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is
> a registered trademark.
> This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended
> solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or
> opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
> represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or related companies. If you are not the
> intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based
> upon its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender
> if you believe you have received this email in error.
>
>
>
> On Mar 18, 2016, at 3:40 AM, Sebastien Goasguen > wrote:
> >
> > Top posting because keeping track is going to be hard.
> >
> >
> > Remi and I have talked several times with David about GitHub access and
> so far the answer has been no.
> >
> 

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9297 - Reworked logic in Stora...

[mike-tutkowski]

Github user mike-tutkowski commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1441#issuecomment-197975991
  
CloudStack iterates over all known snapshot strategies and asks each if it 
can handle a particular situation (take, delete, revert) for a volume or volume 
snapshot.

One with a priority higher than the others is selected.

If you can't handle the particular use case, you return CANT_HANDLE.

On Mar 17, 2016, at 12:49 PM, Rafael Weing?rtner 
> wrote:


Ok @mike-tutkowski, now I believe I 
understand a little bit more of the code.

You are reusing a method that already exist and returns the 
StrategyPriority (you did not create that method to suffice your code). I was 
misled by the name of the method, when I first saw it, I thought that the 
method was used solely to check if it can or cannot proceed with the snapshot 
when in fact it is used to do much more.

I believe "getSnapshotStrategy" would be a more suitable name.

Now that I understand what we have there, I am ok with that conditional as 
it
is.

-
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly or view it on 
GitHub



---
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 enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Re: External fork of Cloudstack

[Chris Mattmann]

Will all of your actions below sound like a sound plan to me.
Consider this the discuss thread. Get feedback for 24-48 hours,
then VOTE, then proceed :-)

Cheers,
Chris



-Original Message-
From:  on behalf of Will Stevens

Reply-To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" 
Date: Friday, March 18, 2016 at 3:30 PM
To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" 
Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack

>Hey All,
>I am going to try to keep moving this forward, and as such, I have created
>the 'apache-cloudstack' organization in github.  I have invited everyone
>who is in the current 'cloudstack' organization as owners as well as Sam
>and Chris (also as owners).
>
>I think using this github org is probably the right one to use moving
>forward with this proposal since it better reflects what the org
>represents.
>
>Sam and Chris, I would like to get your suggestions for how we should plan
>to move forward since I think there is probably going to be more logistics
>and details to work through on your (ASF board) side of things.
>
>To reiterate, I think the best and most seamless approach will be to
>actually transfer ownership of the 'apache/cloudstack' repo to the
>'apache-cloudstack' org to be represented as
>'apache-cloudstack/cloudstack'.  This will move all of the PRs and will
>also setup redirection of requests from 'apache/cloudstack' to
>'apache-cloudstack/cloudstack' which is really important for all existing
>links etc...
>
>I also think we should also consider deleting the 'cloudstack/cloudstack'
>repository unless anyone is actively using it for testing in order to
>reduce confusion on the topic.
>
>I will create a VOTE thread so the community, and the participating ASF
>board members, can officially sign off on the proposal and give feedback.
>
>Cheers,
>
>*Will STEVENS*
>Lead Developer
>
>*CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
>420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
>w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_
>
>On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:48 PM, Sam Ruby  wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:39 PM, sebgoa  wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Mar 18, 2016, at 6:30 PM, Sam Ruby  wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I'm more concerned that the page is indistinguishable from a fork,
>>and
>> >> gives no indication of official status.  That may be OK for a work in
>> >> progress, but isn't ideal as a final solution.  I'll share that I've
>> >> heard (second and third hand) reports of people who only have heard
>>of
>> >> there being an "external fork", and have drawn incorrect conclusions
>> >> from that.  I think we need to be careful about how this is
>>explained,
>> >> as perceptions matter.
>> >
>> > I have updated the organization description and added our website and
>> dev@ address.
>> >
>> >> By contrast, if you go to:
>> >>
>> >> https://github.com/apache/whimsy
>> >>
>> >> What you will see in place of "Mirror of xxx" is "Apache Whimsy".  I
>> >> grant you that it is a small thing,
>> >
>> > We can easily change “Mirror of Apache CloudStack” to “Apache
>> CloudStack”.
>> >
>> > But I think lots of people will get upset as it will really mean that
>> this is a move away from ASF infra.
>> > Or maybe I missing your point.
>>
>> Suggestion for now: “Mirror of Apache CloudStack for testing purposes
>> only”.
>>
>> While what is there now is technically correct, it is incomplete.  In
>> particular it can, and has, caused confusion.  Based on Will's
>> comments earlier in this thread, I believe that my suggestion is an
>> accurate portrayal of the current status, otherwise please substitute
>> a more accurate description.  (the subtext here: I am not an ASF
>> Director stepping in and demanding change, so please don't take
>> anything I say as an edict, I'm simply participating in the
>> conversation).
>>
>> Longer term, this may very well be "Apache CloudStack" in the same
>> sense that the github whimsy repository is "Apache Whimsy".  Or the
>> code could end up in a different place, like the apache-cloudstack
>> organization I suggested previously.
>>
>> - Sam Ruby
>>

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

[Will Stevens]

I am not sure I understand how people wanting to participate with Apache
Cloudstack would ever be at a disadvantage, it would still all be the same
code base.  The changes in cloudstack/cloudstack would get pushed to the
ASF repo and would then get mirrored to the apache/cloudstack repo, so they
would all be in sync.

Out of curiosity, is it possible to have ASF mirror to apache/cloudstack
(as it currently does) and then have apache/cloudstack mirror to
cloudstack/cloudstack?  This way to can guarantee that the ASF repo is the
canonical repo, while also being able to take advantage of an improved dev
workflow and the integration of distributed CI environments.



*Will STEVENS*
Lead Developer

*CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:16 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (3980) <
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:

> Hi Mike,
>
> Thank you. What you describe effectively below is going to
> implicitly switch the “canonical” repo in my opinion of the
>
> repository to cloudstack/cloudstack. Merges that happen there,
> conversation that happens there on PRs and issues, labels, etc.,
> will be captured there and likely at increased pace and velocity,
> leaving the folks wanting to participate in the Apache Cloudstack
> project who aren’t part of cloudstack/cloudstack at a disadvantage.
>
> Thanks for speaking up and looking forward to more discussion.
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: "Tutkowski, Mike" 
> Reply-To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" 
> Date: Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 9:03 AM
> To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" 
> Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull
> request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)
>
> >As far as I understand, cloudstack/cloudstack is only being proposed to
> >help with developer workflow and CI.
> >
> >To my understanding, all code that goes in there will end up back in the
> >canonical ASF CloudStack repo (and, as such, be mirrored to
> >apache/cloudstack).
> >
> >This is simply a workaround to help solve developer workflow and CI
> >issues that we couldn't due to lack of privileges on the current repo.
> >
> >I do not believe anyone on the PMC is talking about forking CloudStack
> >and going off in a different direction.
> >
> >From: Chris Mattmann 
> >Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2016 9:52 AM
> >To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> >Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack
> >pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)
> >
> >Hi Sebastien,
> >
> >
> >[..]
> >>>
> >>> Hi Sebastien,
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for your reply and yes, I am a member of the ASF board.
> >>>
> >>> The thing is, there was already some discussion of this at the
> >>> ASF board meeting that happened yesterday. I can tell you that
> >>> there were more than a few board members that were a bit concerned
> >>> at the prospect of Apache Cloudstack forking and starting a new
> >>> GitHub organization, so I’m here now to discuss.
> >>
> >>We are not forking. In the sense that the canonical repo is at the ASF
> >>and mirrored on apache/cloudstack.
> >
> >OK, good though based on the rest of your replies, I actually see
> >the opposite being said. Also “we” is the relative word here, which
> >I’ll get back to later in this message.
> >
> >>
> >>The cloudstack org on github existed and was empty, one of us contacted
> >>github and we got the “control” of it.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> I’m sorry that you are unhappy with the lack of access to GitHub
> >>> facilities, however I’m confused, the ASF does provide mirroring,
> >>> active GitHub issue,
> >>
> >>As far as I know we cannot use github issues.
> >>[..snip..]
> >>To close PRs you need to make a commit.
> >[..snip..]
> >>Be able to use labels
> >>Be able to setup our own triggers/hooks
> >
> >David Nalley can speak to this as I’m not sure if you can or
> >cannot or if infra@ is providing this. Thanks for stating this.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>> PMC desires and if so can you state that? I remember seeing a request
> >>> that you wanted the ability to close pull requests and to be part of
> >>> the experiment going on with the Whimsy PMC -
> >>
> >>Indeed, and I (we) never heard back.
> >
> >Right - that’s probably b/c it wasn’t discussed with the board
> >until our last meeting which just happened yesterday. It’s
> >my reading of the tea leaves that the experiment, while considered
> >going in the right direction with Whimsy, is not open to other
> >PMCs. It’s possible that we may as a board decide that further
> >response is needed, but until that happens or if that doesn’t happen
> >you can take my response until then.
> >
> >>[..snip..]
> >
> >>
> >>> The other thing is - is the new Cloudstack GitHub organization the
> >>> result of a subset 

Re: Build failed in Jenkins: build-master-slowbuild #3368

[Will Stevens]

Thanks Raja, I appreciate your support on this.  Since 1438 includes the
changes in 1427, I will wait for your suggestions on that one before I do
anything.

*Will STEVENS*
Lead Developer

*CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 3:33 PM, Raja Pullela 
wrote:

> Daan, Will,
>
> I have tested Daan's original PR-1427, and it looks good.  I am running
> into a build issue with the 1438 - nothing related to the checkin.  Hope to
> resolve it later this weekend or on Monday.
>
> Best,
> Raja
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: williamstev...@gmail.com [mailto:williamstev...@gmail.com] On
> Behalf Of Will Stevens
> Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2016 2:19 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Build failed in Jenkins: build-master-slowbuild #3368
>
> @Raja.  Actually, maybe test this one since it includes the same change as
> Daan's, but also includes a couple more changes.
>
> I think only one of these should be merged.
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1438
>
> *Will STEVENS*
> Lead Developer
>
> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 w cloudops.com *|* tw
> @CloudOps_
>
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Will Stevens 
> wrote:
>
> > @Raja, did you have a chance to test this?
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1427
> >
> > *Will STEVENS*
> > Lead Developer
> >
> > *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
> > 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 w cloudops.com *|* tw
> > @CloudOps_
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Daan Hoogland
> > 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> thanks Raja
> >>
> >> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 7:48 PM, Raja Pullela
> >>  >> >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Daan, I will try to test this out..
> >> >
> >> > -Original Message-
> >> > From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com]
> >> > Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 11:57 PM
> >> > To: dev 
> >> > Subject: Fwd: Build failed in Jenkins: build-master-slowbuild #3368
> >> >
> >> > People, these were irritating me. I wrote a quick fix [1].
> >> >
> >> > Anyone feels like running a test on it?
> >> >
> >> > [1] https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1427
> >> >
> >> > -- Forwarded message --
> >> > From: 
> >> > Date: Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:09 PM
> >> > Subject: Build failed in Jenkins: build-master-slowbuild #3368
> >> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org, nicolas.m.vazq...@gmail.com,
> >> > priti.sa...@clogeny.com, nitin.mahar...@gmail.com,
> >> nicovazque...@gmail.com
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > See
> >> > 
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > [...truncated 28679 lines...]
> >> > [INFO]
> >> > [INFO] --- findbugs-maven-plugin:3.0.1:findbugs (findbugs) @
> >> > cloud-quickcloud --- [INFO] [INFO] <<<
> >> > findbugs-maven-plugin:3.0.1:check
> >> > (cloudstack-findbugs) @ cloud-quickcloud <<< [INFO] [INFO] ---
> >> > findbugs-maven-plugin:3.0.1:check (cloudstack-findbugs) @
> >> cloud-quickcloud
> >> > --- [INFO] [INFO] --- cobertura-maven-plugin:2.6:instrument
> >> (default-cli) @
> >> > cloud-quickcloud --- [WARNING] No files to instrument.
> >> > [INFO] NOT adding cobertura ser file to attached artifacts list.
> >> > [INFO]
> >> > [INFO] --- maven-resources-plugin:2.5:testResources
> >> > (default-testResources) @ cloud-quickcloud --- [debug] execute
> >> > contextualize [INFO] Using 'UTF-8' encoding to copy filtered
> resources.
> >> > [INFO] skip non existing resourceDirectory <
> >> >
> >> http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/job/build-master-slowbuild/ws/quickclo
> >> ud/src/test/resources
> >> > >
> >> > [INFO] Copying 3 resources
> >> > [INFO] Copying 3 resources
> >> > [INFO]
> >> > [INFO] --- maven-compiler-plugin:3.2:testCompile
> >> > (default-testCompile) @ cloud-quickcloud --- [INFO] No sources to
> >> > compile [INFO] [INFO] --- maven-surefire-plugin:2.18.1:test
> >> > (default-test) @ cloud-quickcloud --- [INFO] [INFO] <<<
> >> > cobertura-maven-plugin:2.6:cobertura (default-cli) @
> >> > cloud-quickcloud <<< [INFO] [INFO] ---
> >> cobertura-maven-plugin:2.6:cobertura
> >> > (default-cli) @ cloud-quickcloud --- [INFO]
> >> > ---
> >> > -
> >> > [INFO] Reactor Summary:
> >> > [INFO]
> >> > [INFO] Apache CloudStack Developer Tools - Checkstyle Configuration
> >> > SUCCESS [1.742s] [INFO] Apache CloudStack
> >> .
> >> > SUCCESS [2.087s] [INFO] Apache CloudStack Maven Conventions Parent
> >> 
> >> > SUCCESS [0.775s] [INFO] Apache CloudStack Framework - Managed
> >> > Context
> >> .
> >> > SUCCESS [19.383s] [INFO] Apache CloudStack Utils
> >> > ... SUCCESS 

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9305: Cloudstack Usage Breaks ...

[kiwiflyer]

Github user kiwiflyer commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1433#issuecomment-197845922
  
Tested patch on a 4.7.1 lab. 

Prior to patch:
INFO  [cloud.usage.UsageServer] (main:null) (logid:) UsageServer ready...
INFO  [context.support.ClassPathXmlApplicationContext] (main:null) (logid:) 
Refreshing 
org.springframework.context.support.ClassPathXmlApplicationContext@70ea0c2a: 
startup date [Thu Mar 17 06:51:40 CDT 2016]; root of context hierarchy
INFO  [factory.xml.XmlBeanDefinitionReader] (main:null) (logid:) Loading 
XML bean definitions from class path resource [usageApplicationContext.xml]
INFO  [factory.annotation.AutowiredAnnotationBeanPostProcessor] (main:null) 
(logid:) JSR-330 'javax.inject.Inject' annotation found and supported for 
autowiring
INFO  [context.support.ClassPathXmlApplicationContext] (main:null) (logid:) 
Bean 'transactionContextBuilder' of type [class 
com.cloud.utils.db.TransactionContextBuilder] is not eligible for getting 
processed by all BeanPostProcessors (for example: not eligible for 
auto-proxying)
INFO  [factory.support.DefaultListableBeanFactory] (main:null) (logid:) 
Pre-instantiating singletons in 
org.springframework.beans.factory.support.DefaultListableBeanFactory@33037ca5: 
defining beans 
[org.springframework.context.annotation.internalConfigurationAnnotationProcessor,org.springframework.context.annotation.internalAutowiredAnnotationProcessor,org.springframework.context.annotation.internalRequiredAnnotationProcessor,org.springframework.context.annotation.internalCommonAnnotationProcessor,vmDiskUsageParser,networkOfferingUsageParser,VPNUserUsageParser,IPAddressUsageParser,VMSnapshotUsageParser,loadBalancerUsageParser,networkUsageParser,securityGroupUsageParser,storageUsageParser,portForwardingUsageParser,VMInstanceUsageParser,volumeUsageParser,usageManagerImpl,usageAlertManagerImpl,usageVmDiskDaoImpl,usageIPAddressDaoImpl,usageStorageDaoImpl,usageVolumeDaoImpl,usageDaoImpl,usagePortForwardingRuleDaoImpl,usageVPNUserDaoImpl,usageJobDaoImpl,usageLoadBalancerPolicyDaoImpl,u
 
sageNetworkDaoImpl,externalPublicIpStatisticsDaoImpl,usageSecurityGroupDaoImpl,usageVMInstanceDaoImpl,usageNetworkOfferingDaoImpl,usageVMSnapshotDaoImpl,usageEventDetailsDaoImpl,usageEventDaoImpl,eventDaoImpl,SSHKeyPairDaoImpl,userDaoImpl,vmDiskStatisticsDaoImpl,userAccountDaoImpl,accountDaoImpl,userStatsLogDaoImpl,userStatisticsDaoImpl,resourceCountDaoImpl,resourceLimitDaoImpl,alertDaoImpl,domainDaoImpl,configurationDaoImpl,quotaEmailTemplatesDaoImpl,userVmDetailsDaoImpl,quotaUsageDaoImpl,quotaBalanceDaoImpl,quotaTariffDaoImpl,quotaAccountDaoImpl,serviceOfferingDaoImpl,quotaCreditsDaoImpl,quotaAlertManagerImpl,quotaStatementImpl,quotaManagerImpl,transactionContextBuilder,instantiatePostProcessor,ComponentContext,org.springframework.context.annotation.ConfigurationClassPostProcessor.importAwareProcessor];
 root of factory hierarchy
DEBUG [utils.crypt.EncryptionSecretKeyChecker] (main:null) (logid:) 
Encryption Type: file
INFO  [db.Transaction.Transaction] (main:null) (logid:) Is Data Base High 
Availiability enabled? Ans : true
INFO  [db.Transaction.Transaction] (main:null) (logid:) The slaves 
configured for Cloud Data base is/are : 10.103.0.154,10.103.0.155


After patch:
INFO  [utils.component.ComponentContext] (main:null) (logid:) Starting 
com.cloud.usage.dao.UsageVMSnapshotDaoImpl_EnhancerByCloudStack_c20890bf
INFO  [utils.component.ComponentContext] (main:null) (logid:) Starting 
org.apache.cloudstack.quota.QuotaStatementImpl_EnhancerByCloudStack_5d0529b4
INFO  [cloudstack.quota.QuotaStatementImpl] (main:null) (logid:) Starting 
Statement Manager
INFO  [utils.component.ComponentContext] (main:null) (logid:) Starting 
org.apache.cloudstack.quota.QuotaManagerImpl_EnhancerByCloudStack_3ffc3462
INFO  [cloudstack.quota.QuotaManagerImpl] (main:null) (logid:) Starting 
Quota Manager
INFO  [utils.component.ComponentContext] (main:null) (logid:) Starting 
com.cloud.usage.UsageManagerImpl_EnhancerByCloudStack_93e4d889
INFO  [cloud.usage.UsageManagerImpl] (main:null) (logid:) Starting Usage 
Manager
INFO  [utils.component.ComponentContext] (main:null) (logid:) Starting 
com.cloud.usage.UsageAlertManagerImpl_EnhancerByCloudStack_8fa0a2a9
INFO  [utils.component.ComponentContext] (main:null) (logid:) Starting 
org.apache.cloudstack.quota.QuotaAlertManagerImpl_EnhancerByCloudStack_9535c670
INFO  [cloudstack.quota.QuotaAlertManagerImpl] (main:null) (logid:) 
Starting Alert Manager
INFO  [cloud.usage.UsageServer] (main:null) (logid:) UsageServer ready...


LGTM




---
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 enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file 

Re: External fork of Cloudstack

[Sam Ruby]

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 11:36 AM, sebgoa  wrote:
>
>> What would you be able to do if the git-dual experiment were expanded to 
>> CloudStack that you couldn't do with the proposal above?  I suggest that you 
>> take full advantage of the fact that people are now listening.
>
> Thanks for chiming in Sam,
>
> Could you give us a summary of the Whimsy experiment ? (keeping in mind that 
> most folks on dev@ are not members, did not listen on board@ ML or did not 
> dig through ML archives).
>
> -What are you doing ?
> -For what reasons ?
> -Why is it a challenge for ASF ?

I suggest that the answers to all three can be found here:

https://whimsy.apache.org/board/minutes/Discussion_Items.html#minutes_2015_11_18

Updates can be found in the whimsy and infra reports:

https://whimsy.apache.org/board/minutes/Whimsy.html
https://whimsy.apache.org/board/minutes/Infrastructure.html

These latter two are generally published on a one month delay; the
February update should be published by Monday.

If, after reading these items, you have specific questions post them
here, and I'll see that they get answered.

>> How can I help?  I'd like to bring this proposal back to the board for wider 
>> review so that nothing important is missed.  If there are issues that come 
>> up, I will help flatten them.
>
> Thanks for being open and offering to help.
> Indeed let’s figure this out.

Thanks!

- Sam Ruby

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

[Will Stevens]

If this gives us the github permissions we need, then we need to work with
them to figure out the details...

*Will STEVENS*
Lead Developer

*CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 3:24 PM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:

> That sounds like a cop-out to me related to what's really going
> on.
>
> > On Mar 17, 2016, at 12:03 PM, Tutkowski, Mike 
> wrote:
> >
> > As far as I understand, cloudstack/cloudstack is only being proposed to
> help with developer workflow and CI.
> >
> > To my understanding, all code that goes in there will end up back in the
> canonical ASF CloudStack repo (and, as such, be mirrored to
> apache/cloudstack).
> >
> > This is simply a workaround to help solve developer workflow and CI
> issues that we couldn't due to lack of privileges on the current repo.
> >
> > I do not believe anyone on the PMC is talking about forking CloudStack
> and going off in a different direction.
> > 
> > From: Chris Mattmann 
> > Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2016 9:52 AM
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack
> pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)
> >
> > Hi Sebastien,
> >
> >
> > [..]
> >>>
> >>> Hi Sebastien,
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for your reply and yes, I am a member of the ASF board.
> >>>
> >>> The thing is, there was already some discussion of this at the
> >>> ASF board meeting that happened yesterday. I can tell you that
> >>> there were more than a few board members that were a bit concerned
> >>> at the prospect of Apache Cloudstack forking and starting a new
> >>> GitHub organization, so I’m here now to discuss.
> >>
> >> We are not forking. In the sense that the canonical repo is at the ASF
> >> and mirrored on apache/cloudstack.
> >
> > OK, good though based on the rest of your replies, I actually see
> > the opposite being said. Also “we” is the relative word here, which
> > I’ll get back to later in this message.
> >
> >>
> >> The cloudstack org on github existed and was empty, one of us contacted
> >> github and we got the “control” of it.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> I’m sorry that you are unhappy with the lack of access to GitHub
> >>> facilities, however I’m confused, the ASF does provide mirroring,
> >>> active GitHub issue,
> >>
> >> As far as I know we cannot use github issues.
> >> [..snip..]
> >> To close PRs you need to make a commit.
> > [..snip..]
> >> Be able to use labels
> >> Be able to setup our own triggers/hooks
> >
> > David Nalley can speak to this as I’m not sure if you can or
> > cannot or if infra@ is providing this. Thanks for stating this.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>> PMC desires and if so can you state that? I remember seeing a request
> >>> that you wanted the ability to close pull requests and to be part of
> >>> the experiment going on with the Whimsy PMC -
> >>
> >> Indeed, and I (we) never heard back.
> >
> > Right - that’s probably b/c it wasn’t discussed with the board
> > until our last meeting which just happened yesterday. It’s
> > my reading of the tea leaves that the experiment, while considered
> > going in the right direction with Whimsy, is not open to other
> > PMCs. It’s possible that we may as a board decide that further
> > response is needed, but until that happens or if that doesn’t happen
> > you can take my response until then.
> >
> >> [..snip..]
> >
> >>
> >>> The other thing is - is the new Cloudstack GitHub organization the
> >>> result of a subset of the PMC going off and doing this -
> >>
> >> I am not sure why you say subset. Let’s try to avoid polemics.
> >
> > I’m not trying to attack.
> >
> > I asked a simple question - how many/who in the Apache CloudStack PMC
> > is intent on using this new Cloudstack GitHub organization? Not an
> > attack, a question that I still don’t have an answer to.
> >
> > I also wanted to gauge whether there are others on the PMC that will
> > speak up. I’ll continue waiting to hear more about that.
> >
> >> [..snip..]
> >> Again, this is not about leaving the ASF. This is about accessing
> >> productive tools and making use of them to their fullest.
> >>
> >>> Finally, as for the Apache Cloudstack PMC - for the PMC the policy of
> >>> the ASF is that the canonical repository at the moment is on ASF
> >>> hardware.
> >>
> >> And we would like the ASF to reconsider this.
> >
> > Put bluntly, the decision is no, and it is in the hands of the ASF Infra@
> > and based on
> > discussions I’ve seen on public lists there and on board@ and part of
> the
> > board
> > meeting yesterday, Infra@ is not opening up the Whimsy experiment to
> other
> > PMCs
> > as of yet. They aren’t ready to declare an SLA; they aren’t ready for
> > potential
> > other PMCs to ask to use it too and for others to start thinking that
> > capability
> > is anything near 

Re: Issue: CLOUDSTACK-9255 Unable to start VM DomainRouter due to error in finalizeStart

[Wei ZHOU]

nice !!

2016-03-18 11:58 GMT+01:00 martin kolly :

> Hi All
>
> We are facing the same issue as reported by Milamber (Ticket 9255)
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9255. When deploying a
> couple of VMs or Port Forwarding's the re-deployment of the router with
> cleanup fails.
>
> We found that iptables configuration takes a lot of time, this eventually
> leads to a timeout on the management server "Unable to start VM
> DomainRouter due to error in finalizeStart, not retrying"
>
> Environment:
> - Cloudstack 4.8
> - KVM (local storage)
> - hosts/mgr on Ubuntu 14.04
>
> We tested with a simple set of four forwarding rules, here the setup:
>
> root@r-96-VM:~# cat /etc/cloudstack/forwardingrules.json
> {
> "185.20.146.56": [
> {
> "internal_ip": "10.100.1.95",
> "internal_ports": "22:22",
> "protocol": "tcp",
> "public_ip": "185.20.146.56",
> "public_ports": "22:22",
> "type": "forward"
> }
> ],
> "185.20.146.79": [
> {
> "internal_ip": "10.100.1.42",
> "internal_ports": "22:22",
> "protocol": "tcp",
> "public_ip": "185.20.146.79",
> "public_ports": "22:22",
> "type": "forward"
> },
> {
> "internal_ip": "10.100.1.42",
> "internal_ports": "8443:8443",
> "protocol": "tcp",
> "public_ip": "185.20.146.79",
> "public_ports": "8443:8443",
> "type": "forward"
> },
> {
> "internal_ip": "10.100.1.42",
> "internal_ports": "53:53",
> "protocol": "udp",
> "public_ip": "185.20.146.79",
> "public_ports": "53:53",
> "type": "forward"
> }
> ],
> "id": "forwardingrules"
>
> The definition for every port forwarding seems to take at ~1.5 seconds.
>
> python /opt/cloud/bin/configure.py.timed
> /etc/cloudstack/forwardingrules.json
>
> -A PREROUTING -d 185.20.146.79/32 -i eth2 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 22 -j
> DNAT --to-destination 10.100.1.42:22
> time : 0.000965118408203
> -A PREROUTING -d 185.20.146.79/32 -i eth0 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 22 -j
> DNAT --to-destination 10.100.1.42:22
> time : 0.395485162735
> -A OUTPUT -d 185.20.146.79/32 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 22 -j DNAT
> --to-destination 10.100.1.42:22
> time : 0.395533084869
> -j SNAT --to-source 10.100.1.1 -A POSTROUTING -s 10.100.1.0/24 -d
> 10.100.1.42/32 -o eth0 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 22
> time : 1.16180706024
> -A PREROUTING -d 185.20.146.79/32 -i eth2 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 22 -j
> MARK --set-xmark 0x2/0x
> time : 1.16329216957
> -A PREROUTING -d 185.20.146.79/32 -i eth2 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 22 -m
> state --state NEW -j CONNMARK --save-mark --nfmask 0x --ctmask
> 0x
> time : 1.16407108307
> -A FORWARD -i eth2 -o eth0 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 22 -m state --state
> NEW,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT
> Total time for creating Policy : 1.53959512711
> --
> -A PREROUTING -d 185.20.146.79/32 -i eth2 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 8443 -j
> DNAT --to-destination 10.100.1.42:8443
> time : 0.000781059265137
> -A PREROUTING -d 185.20.146.79/32 -i eth0 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 8443 -j
> DNAT --to-destination 10.100.1.42:8443
> time : 0.378201007843
> -A OUTPUT -d 185.20.146.79/32 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 8443 -j DNAT
> --to-destination 10.100.1.42:8443
> time : 0.37822508812
> -j SNAT --to-source 10.100.1.1 -A POSTROUTING -s 10.100.1.0/24 -d
> 10.100.1.42/32 -o eth0 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 8443
> time : 1.14627504349
> -A PREROUTING -d 185.20.146.79/32 -i eth2 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 8443 -j
> MARK --set-xmark 0x2/0x
> time : 1.1477329731
> -A PREROUTING -d 185.20.146.79/32 -i eth2 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 8443 -m
> state --state NEW -j CONNMARK --save-mark --nfmask 0x --ctmask
> 0x
> time : 1.14850592613
> -A FORWARD -i eth2 -o eth0 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 8443 -m state --state
> NEW,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT
> Total time for creating Policy : 1.52321791649
> --
> -A PREROUTING -d 185.20.146.79/32 -i eth2 -p udp -m udp --dport 53 -j
> DNAT --to-destination 10.100.1.42:53
> time : 0.000754117965698
> -A PREROUTING -d 185.20.146.79/32 -i eth0 -p udp -m udp --dport 53 -j
> DNAT --to-destination 10.100.1.42:53
> time : 0.383729934692
> -A OUTPUT -d 185.20.146.79/32 -p udp -m udp --dport 53 -j DNAT
> --to-destination 10.100.1.42:53
> time : 0.383754968643
> -j SNAT --to-source 10.100.1.1 -A POSTROUTING -s 10.100.1.0/24 -d
> 10.100.1.42/32 -o eth0 -p udp -m udp --dport 53
> time : 1.14376091957
> -A PREROUTING -d 185.20.146.79/32 -i eth2 -p udp -m udp --dport 53 -j
> MARK --set-xmark 0x2/0x
> time : 1.14526605606
> -A PREROUTING -d 185.20.146.79/32 -i eth2 -p udp -m udp --dport 53 -m
> state --state NEW -j CONNMARK --save-mark --nfmask 0x --ctmask
> 0x
> time : 

Re: [VOTE] Move 'apache/cloudstack' -> 'apache-cloudstack/cloudstack'

[Tutkowski, Mike]

+1

From: ilya 
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2016 9:23 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Move 'apache/cloudstack' -> 'apache-cloudstack/cloudstack'

+1 Binding.

I dont see anything wrong with this approach especially if it helps to
solve our backlog issue.

On 3/18/16 3:44 PM, Will Stevens wrote:
> We are discussing this proposal in 3 or 4 threads, so I will not try to
> recap everything.  Instead I will try to give a brief overview of the
> problem and a proposal for solving it.
>
> *Problem:*
> The Apache CloudStack community needs additional github permissions in
> order to integrate CI for the purpose of maintaining code quality.  The ASF
> does not have enough granular control via the 'apache' github organization
> to give the 'apache/cloudstack' repository the needed permissions.
>
> *Proposal:*
> Transfer ownership of the 'apache/cloudstack' mirrored repository out of
> the 'apache' github organization into the 'apache-cloudstack' github
> organization (which I have already setup and started inviting users to).
> Both members of the ACS community and the ASF board will have 'owner'
> permissions on this new organization.  This will allow for permissions to
> be applied specifically to the 'apache-cloudstack' organization and not
> have to be applied to the entire 'apache' organization.
>
> By transferring ownership, all of the PRs will be copied to the new
> repository and redirects will be created on github from 'apache/cloudstack'
> to 'apache-cloudstack/cloudstack'.
>
> The developer workflow and commit workflow will remain unchanged.  The
> canonical ASF repository (git://git.apache.org/cloudstack.git) will remain
> the source of truth and commits will be made to that repository.
>
> Please ask if anything is unclear or needs to be better defined in order
> for you to cast a vote.
>

RE: [VOTE] Move 'apache/cloudstack' -> 'apache-cloudstack/cloudstack'

[Simon Weller]

+1

Simon Weller/ENA
(615) 312-6068

-Original Message-
From: Will Stevens [williamstev...@gmail.com]
Received: Friday, 18 Mar 2016, 5:45PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org [dev@cloudstack.apache.org]
Subject: [VOTE] Move 'apache/cloudstack' -> 'apache-cloudstack/cloudstack'

We are discussing this proposal in 3 or 4 threads, so I will not try to
recap everything.  Instead I will try to give a brief overview of the
problem and a proposal for solving it.

*Problem:*
The Apache CloudStack community needs additional github permissions in
order to integrate CI for the purpose of maintaining code quality.  The ASF
does not have enough granular control via the 'apache' github organization
to give the 'apache/cloudstack' repository the needed permissions.

*Proposal:*
Transfer ownership of the 'apache/cloudstack' mirrored repository out of
the 'apache' github organization into the 'apache-cloudstack' github
organization (which I have already setup and started inviting users to).
Both members of the ACS community and the ASF board will have 'owner'
permissions on this new organization.  This will allow for permissions to
be applied specifically to the 'apache-cloudstack' organization and not
have to be applied to the entire 'apache' organization.

By transferring ownership, all of the PRs will be copied to the new
repository and redirects will be created on github from 'apache/cloudstack'
to 'apache-cloudstack/cloudstack'.

The developer workflow and commit workflow will remain unchanged.  The
canonical ASF repository (git://git.apache.org/cloudstack.git) will remain
the source of truth and commits will be made to that repository.

Please ask if anything is unclear or needs to be better defined in order
for you to cast a vote.

Re: External fork of Cloudstack

[Will Stevens]

Hey All,
I am going to try to keep moving this forward, and as such, I have created
the 'apache-cloudstack' organization in github.  I have invited everyone
who is in the current 'cloudstack' organization as owners as well as Sam
and Chris (also as owners).

I think using this github org is probably the right one to use moving
forward with this proposal since it better reflects what the org
represents.

Sam and Chris, I would like to get your suggestions for how we should plan
to move forward since I think there is probably going to be more logistics
and details to work through on your (ASF board) side of things.

To reiterate, I think the best and most seamless approach will be to
actually transfer ownership of the 'apache/cloudstack' repo to the
'apache-cloudstack' org to be represented as
'apache-cloudstack/cloudstack'.  This will move all of the PRs and will
also setup redirection of requests from 'apache/cloudstack' to
'apache-cloudstack/cloudstack' which is really important for all existing
links etc...

I also think we should also consider deleting the 'cloudstack/cloudstack'
repository unless anyone is actively using it for testing in order to
reduce confusion on the topic.

I will create a VOTE thread so the community, and the participating ASF
board members, can officially sign off on the proposal and give feedback.

Cheers,

*Will STEVENS*
Lead Developer

*CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:48 PM, Sam Ruby  wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:39 PM, sebgoa  wrote:
> >
> >> On Mar 18, 2016, at 6:30 PM, Sam Ruby  wrote:
> >>
> >> I'm more concerned that the page is indistinguishable from a fork, and
> >> gives no indication of official status.  That may be OK for a work in
> >> progress, but isn't ideal as a final solution.  I'll share that I've
> >> heard (second and third hand) reports of people who only have heard of
> >> there being an "external fork", and have drawn incorrect conclusions
> >> from that.  I think we need to be careful about how this is explained,
> >> as perceptions matter.
> >
> > I have updated the organization description and added our website and
> dev@ address.
> >
> >> By contrast, if you go to:
> >>
> >> https://github.com/apache/whimsy
> >>
> >> What you will see in place of "Mirror of xxx" is "Apache Whimsy".  I
> >> grant you that it is a small thing,
> >
> > We can easily change “Mirror of Apache CloudStack” to “Apache
> CloudStack”.
> >
> > But I think lots of people will get upset as it will really mean that
> this is a move away from ASF infra.
> > Or maybe I missing your point.
>
> Suggestion for now: “Mirror of Apache CloudStack for testing purposes
> only”.
>
> While what is there now is technically correct, it is incomplete.  In
> particular it can, and has, caused confusion.  Based on Will's
> comments earlier in this thread, I believe that my suggestion is an
> accurate portrayal of the current status, otherwise please substitute
> a more accurate description.  (the subtext here: I am not an ASF
> Director stepping in and demanding change, so please don't take
> anything I say as an edict, I'm simply participating in the
> conversation).
>
> Longer term, this may very well be "Apache CloudStack" in the same
> sense that the github whimsy repository is "Apache Whimsy".  Or the
> code could end up in a different place, like the apache-cloudstack
> organization I suggested previously.
>
> - Sam Ruby
>

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: [4.5] vmware: improve support for disk co...

[bvbharatk]

Github user bvbharatk commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1366#issuecomment-198578324
  
### ACS CI BVT Run
 **Sumarry:**
 Build Number 112
 Hypervisor xenserver
 NetworkType Advanced
 Passed=105
 Failed=13
 Skipped=4

**The follwing tests have known issues**
test_vpc_remote_access_vpn
test_vpc_site2site_vpn
test_01_test_vm_volume_snapshot
test_02_vpc_privategw_static_routes
test_03_rvpc_privategw_static_routes
test_04_change_offering_small
ContextSuite context=TestNiciraContoller>:setup
test_01_primary_storage_iscsi
test02_internallb_haproxy_stats_on_all_interfaces
test_01_internallb_roundrobin_1VPC_3VM_HTTP_port80
ContextSuite context=TestDeployVM>:setup
test_04_extract_template
test_04_extract_Iso
test_07_list_default_iso


_Link to logs Folder (search by build_no):_ 
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/yj3wnzbceo9uef2/AAB6u-Iap-xztdm6jHX9SjPja?dl=0


**Failed tests:**
* integration.smoke.test_guest_vlan_range.TestDedicateGuestVlanRange

 * test_dedicateGuestVlanRange Failing since 3 runs


**Skipped tests:**
test_vm_nic_adapter_vmxnet3
test_deploy_vgpu_enabled_vm
test_06_copy_template
test_06_copy_iso

**Passed test suits:**
integration.smoke.test_deploy_vm_with_userdata.TestDeployVmWithUserData

integration.smoke.test_affinity_groups_projects.TestDeployVmWithAffinityGroup
integration.smoke.test_portable_publicip.TestPortablePublicIPAcquire
integration.smoke.test_over_provisioning.TestUpdateOverProvision
integration.smoke.test_global_settings.TestUpdateConfigWithScope
integration.smoke.test_scale_vm.TestScaleVm
integration.smoke.test_service_offerings.TestCreateServiceOffering
integration.smoke.test_loadbalance.TestLoadBalance
integration.smoke.test_routers.TestRouterServices
integration.smoke.test_reset_vm_on_reboot.TestResetVmOnReboot
integration.smoke.test_snapshots.TestSnapshotRootDisk

integration.smoke.test_deploy_vms_with_varied_deploymentplanners.TestDeployVmWithVariedPlanners
integration.smoke.test_network.TestDeleteAccount
integration.smoke.test_non_contigiousvlan.TestUpdatePhysicalNetwork
integration.smoke.test_deploy_vm_iso.TestDeployVMFromISO
integration.smoke.test_public_ip_range.TestDedicatePublicIPRange
integration.smoke.test_multipleips_per_nic.TestDeployVM
integration.smoke.test_regions.TestRegions
integration.smoke.test_affinity_groups.TestDeployVmWithAffinityGroup
integration.smoke.test_network_acl.TestNetworkACL
integration.smoke.test_pvlan.TestPVLAN
integration.smoke.test_volumes.TestCreateVolume
integration.smoke.test_ssvm.TestSSVMs
integration.smoke.test_nic.TestNic
integration.smoke.test_deploy_vm_root_resize.TestDeployVM
integration.smoke.test_resource_detail.TestResourceDetail
integration.smoke.test_secondary_storage.TestSecStorageServices
integration.smoke.test_vm_life_cycle.TestDeployVM
integration.smoke.test_disk_offerings.TestCreateDiskOffering


---
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 enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack-docs-admin pull request: OSPF: WIP formatting documenta...

[agneya2001]

GitHub user agneya2001 opened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-docs-admin/pull/36

OSPF: WIP formatting documentation for ospf

WIP: documentation for ospf

You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

$ git pull https://github.com/agneya2001/cloudstack-docs-admin master-quagga

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-docs-admin/pull/36.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

This closes #36


commit cb02452042ca1ac8d1d1cbbd3e68e9831f4d8536
Author: Abhinandan Prateek 
Date:   2016-03-18T08:26:30Z

OSPF: WIP formatting documentation for ospf




---
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 enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Build failed in Jenkins: build-master-slowbuild #3486

[jenkins]

See 

Changes:

[maneesha.papireddygari] CLOUDSTACK-8800 : Improved the listVirtualMachines API 
call to include

--
[...truncated 28679 lines...]
[INFO] 
[INFO] --- findbugs-maven-plugin:3.0.1:findbugs (findbugs) @ cloud-quickcloud 
---
[INFO] 
[INFO] <<< findbugs-maven-plugin:3.0.1:check (cloudstack-findbugs) @ 
cloud-quickcloud <<<
[INFO] 
[INFO] --- findbugs-maven-plugin:3.0.1:check (cloudstack-findbugs) @ 
cloud-quickcloud ---
[INFO] 
[INFO] --- cobertura-maven-plugin:2.6:instrument (default-cli) @ 
cloud-quickcloud ---
[WARNING] No files to instrument.
[INFO] NOT adding cobertura ser file to attached artifacts list.
[INFO] 
[INFO] --- maven-resources-plugin:2.5:testResources (default-testResources) @ 
cloud-quickcloud ---
[debug] execute contextualize
[INFO] Using 'UTF-8' encoding to copy filtered resources.
[INFO] skip non existing resourceDirectory 

[INFO] Copying 3 resources
[INFO] Copying 3 resources
[INFO] 
[INFO] --- maven-compiler-plugin:3.2:testCompile (default-testCompile) @ 
cloud-quickcloud ---
[INFO] No sources to compile
[INFO] 
[INFO] --- maven-surefire-plugin:2.18.1:test (default-test) @ cloud-quickcloud 
---
[INFO] 
[INFO] <<< cobertura-maven-plugin:2.6:cobertura (default-cli) @ 
cloud-quickcloud <<<
[INFO] 
[INFO] --- cobertura-maven-plugin:2.6:cobertura (default-cli) @ 
cloud-quickcloud ---
[INFO] 
[INFO] Reactor Summary:
[INFO] 
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Developer Tools - Checkstyle Configuration  SUCCESS 
[1.777s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack . SUCCESS [2.107s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Maven Conventions Parent  SUCCESS [0.774s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Framework - Managed Context . SUCCESS [18.886s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Utils ... SUCCESS [1:30.819s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Framework ... SUCCESS [0.105s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Framework - Event Notification .. SUCCESS [54.343s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Framework - Configuration ... SUCCESS [27.798s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack API . SUCCESS [1:50.591s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Framework - REST  SUCCESS [16.836s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Framework - IPC . SUCCESS [30.508s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Cloud Engine  SUCCESS [0.093s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Cloud Engine API  SUCCESS [28.558s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Framework - Security  SUCCESS [25.770s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Core  SUCCESS [1:20.984s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Agents .. SUCCESS [36.514s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Framework - Clustering .. SUCCESS [36.454s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Framework - Event Notification .. SUCCESS [14.368s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Cloud Engine Schema Component ... SUCCESS [2:06.971s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Framework - Jobs  SUCCESS [41.357s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Cloud Engine Internal Components API  SUCCESS [26.456s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Server .. SUCCESS [4:13.644s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Framework - Quota ... SUCCESS [38.131s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Usage Server  SUCCESS [44.593s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Cloud Engine Orchestration Component  SUCCESS 
[1:21.260s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Cloud Services .. SUCCESS [0.066s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Secondary Storage ... SUCCESS [0.446s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Secondary Storage Service ... SUCCESS [54.353s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Engine Storage Component  SUCCESS [48.468s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Engine Storage Volume Component . SUCCESS [30.822s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Engine Storage Image Component .. SUCCESS [26.658s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Engine Storage Data Motion Component  SUCCESS [25.839s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Engine Storage Cache Component .. SUCCESS [20.390s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Engine Storage Snapshot Component  SUCCESS [35.231s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Cloud Engine API  SUCCESS [12.419s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Cloud Engine Service  SUCCESS [7.848s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Plugin POM .. SUCCESS [0.979s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Plugin - API Rate Limit . SUCCESS [26.917s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Plugin - Storage Volume default provider  SUCCESS 
[23.629s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Plugin - Storage Volume SolidFire Provider  SUCCESS 
[36.469s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Plugin - API SolidFire .. SUCCESS [17.494s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Plugin - API Discovery .. SUCCESS [23.492s]
[INFO] Apache CloudStack Plugin - ACL Static Role Based .. 

External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

[Chris Mattmann]

Hi,

Sorry about my crude way of filing a PR for this, but I heard
information about the Apache Cloudstack PMC actively
discussing managing the project with GitHub as the primary source
in a different organization than the github.com/apache/ org.

Can someone clarify this for me? Clearly wearing my board hat,
this is not something we allow for any of our ASF projects.

Cheers,
Chris “board hat on” Mattmann

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...

[runseb]

Github user runseb commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1442#issuecomment-197508627
  
Which ironically we can't close, so I hope @chrismattmann  you will close 
it, thank you


---
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 enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Build failed in Jenkins: build-systemvm64-master #780

[jenkins]

See 

Changes:

[maneesha.papireddygari] CLOUDSTACK-8800 : Improved the listVirtualMachines API 
call to include

--
[...truncated 3363 lines...]
  
100% [Working]
  
100% [Packages 1,793 kB]

100% [Working]
  
100% [Packages 28.5 MB]
100% [Packages 28.5 MB]
   
100% [Working]
  
100% [Packages 1,806 kB]

100% [Working]
  
100% [Packages 28.5 MB]
100% [Packages 28.5 MB]
   
100% [Working]
  
100% [Translation-en 1,234 kB]
  
100% [Working]
  
100% [Translation-en 18.5 MB]
100% [Translation-en 18.5 MB]
 
100% [Working]
  
100% [Sources 16.0 kB]
  
100% [Working]
  
Fetched 8,246 B in 3s (2,171 B/s)

Reading package lists... 0%

Reading package lists... 0%

Reading package lists... 1%

Reading package lists... 26%

Reading package lists... 31%

Reading package lists... 31%

Reading package lists... 49%

Reading package lists... 63%

Reading package lists... 63%

Reading package lists... 76%

Reading package lists... 84%

Reading package lists... 84%

Reading package lists... 86%

Reading package lists... 86%

Reading package lists... 88%

Reading package lists... 88%

Reading package lists... 90%

Reading package lists... 90%

Reading package lists... 90%

Reading package lists... 90%

Reading package lists... 90%

Reading package lists... 90%

Reading package lists... 90%

Reading package lists... 90%

Reading package lists... 93%

Reading package lists... 93%

Reading package lists... 97%

Reading package lists... 97%

Reading package lists... 99%

Reading package lists... 99%

Reading package lists... Done

+ apt-get -y --force-yes upgrade

Reading package lists... 0%

Reading package lists... 100%

Reading package lists... Done


Building dependency tree... 0%

Building dependency tree... 0%

Building dependency tree... 50%

Building dependency tree... 50%

Building dependency tree   


Reading state information... 0%

Reading state information... 0%

Reading state information... Done

The following packages have been kept back:
  openswan
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1 not upgraded.
+ '[' amd64 == amd64 ']'
+ wget http://people.apache.org/~rajeshbattala/hv-kvp-daemon_3.1_amd64.deb
--2016-03-17 09:40:56--  
http://people.apache.org/~rajeshbattala/hv-kvp-daemon_3.1_amd64.deb
Resolving people.apache.org (people.apache.org)... 163.172.16.173, 
2001:bc8:2142:100::
Connecting to people.apache.org (people.apache.org)|163.172.16.173|:80... 
connected.
HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 404 Not Found
2016-03-17 09:40:56 ERROR 404: Not Found.

ERROR: exit code 8
Error executing command ./install_systemvm_packages.sh : Exitcode was not what 
we expected
Exitcode was not what we expected
+ on_exit
+ (( i=5-1  ))
+ (( i>=0  ))
+ sleep 2
+ log DEBUG 'on_exit: veewee_destroy'
+ local level=DEBUG
+ shift
+ [[ 1 != \1 ]]
+ local code=
++ date '+%F %T'
+ local 'line=[2016-03-17 09:40:58] DEBUG: on_exit: veewee_destroy'
+ '[' -t 2 ']'
+ echo '[2016-03-17 09:40:58] DEBUG: on_exit: veewee_destroy'
[2016-03-17 09:40:58] DEBUG: on_exit: veewee_destroy
+ eval veewee_destroy
++ veewee_destroy
++ log INFO 'destroying existing veewee image, if any'
++ local level=INFO
++ shift
++ [[ 1 != \1 ]]
++ local code=
+++ date '+%F %T'
++ local 'line=[2016-03-17 09:40:58] INFO: destroying existing veewee image, if 
any'
++ '[' -t 2 ']'
++ echo '[2016-03-17 09:40:58] INFO: destroying existing veewee image, if any'
[2016-03-17 09:40:58] INFO: destroying existing veewee image, if any
++ set +e
++ bundle exec veewee vbox destroy systemvm64template-master-4.6.0
Shutting down vm systemvm64template-master-4.6.0
VBoxManage unregistervm  "systemvm64template-master-4.6.0" --delete
Deleting vm systemvm64template-master-4.6.0
++ set -e
+ (( i--  ))
+ (( i>=0  ))
+ sleep 2
+ log DEBUG 'on_exit: rm -f cloud_scripts_shar_archive.sh'
+ local level=DEBUG
+ shift
+ [[ 1 != \1 ]]
+ local code=
++ date '+%F %T'
+ local 'line=[2016-03-17 09:41:05] DEBUG: on_exit: rm -f 
cloud_scripts_shar_archive.sh'
+ '[' -t 2 ']'
+ echo '[2016-03-17 09:41:05] DEBUG: on_exit: rm -f 
cloud_scripts_shar_archive.sh'
[2016-03-17 09:41:05] DEBUG: on_exit: rm -f cloud_scripts_shar_archive.sh
+ eval rm -f cloud_scripts_shar_archive.sh
++ rm -f cloud_scripts_shar_archive.sh
+ (( i--  ))
+ (( i>=0  ))
+ sleep 2
+ log DEBUG 'on_exit: rm -rf definitions/systemvm64template-master-4.6.0'
+ local level=DEBUG
+ shift
+ [[ 1 != \1 ]]
+ local code=
++ date '+%F %T'
+ local 'line=[2016-03-17 09:41:07] DEBUG: on_exit: rm -rf 
definitions/systemvm64template-master-4.6.0'
+ '[' -t 2 ']'
+ echo '[2016-03-17 09:41:07] DEBUG: on_exit: rm -rf 
definitions/systemvm64template-master-4.6.0'

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9297: delete snapshot without ...

[rafaelweingartner]

Github user rafaelweingartner commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1441#issuecomment-197892051
  
@mike-tutkowski  could you fix the PR title and improve its description (a 
brief description of the problem and solution would do)?

Additionally, what about some unit tests to "canHandle" method? I also 
recommend to change that method return, a boolean return is more intuitive in 
my opinion; I also believe that a Java doc to that method would be appreciated.


---
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 enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

AW: [POLL] Interest for EU based event/collab

[Walter , André]

Hi Erik,

we are heading for 16th of June from 13:00 -17:30 CET (I am working together 
with Steve to finalize the speakers/agenda) and you are more than welcome ☺.

Best regards.
Andre

Von: Erik Weber [mailto:terbol...@gmail.com]
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 16. März 2016 20:51
An: Giles Sirett
Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Walter, André; Steve Roles
Betreff: Re: [POLL] Interest for EU based event/collab

Hi Giles,
Berlin is great!
Has there been any discussions about a specific date yet? Personally I have 
some vacation plans in that time frame (not that it should matter for the 
event).
I agree that combing the efforts we have is a good thing, I am hoping for 
something bigger than a traditional UG at some point as it is hard to defend 
the costs for a 3-4 hour event.

--
Erik


On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 4:22 PM, Giles Sirett 
> wrote:
Erik

I've responded to your survey (don’t know how useful my response will be, I've 
said "yes" to everything)


One idea: we have a quarterly meeting of the Cloudstack EU UG.
We got 50 along to the last one. It’s a different audience to the usual CCC 
attendees (more users than devs)

For the next one (early June), we're planning on having it in Berlin

Andre and the folks from BitGroup are taking the lead on it

It would seem perfectly logical to me to combine anything we (i.e. the 
community) do with one of these UG's - gain more critical mass more quickly and 
make it more attractive to potential sponsors

I'm not sure how far down the path Andre et al are with logistics and whether 
the idea of making this into a bigger thing would scare him, but it may be 
worth you two syncing on this

We only have these meetings quarterly, the one after June would clash with 
Brasil so likely not to happen



Kind Regards
Giles


[ShapeBlue]

Giles Sirett

CEO

,

ShapeBlue



d:

+44  20 3603 0541 | s: +44 203 603 
0540

 |

m:

+44 7961112055


e:

giles.sir...@shapeblue.com | t: 

 |

w:

www.shapeblue.com


a:

53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden London WC2N 4HS UK



[cid:image002.png@01D17FC5.FB6DFFB0]



Shape Blue Ltd is a company incorporated in England & Wales. ShapeBlue Services 
India LLP is a company incorporated in India and is operated under license from 
Shape Blue Ltd. Shape Blue Brasil Consultoria Ltda is a company incorporated in 
Brasil and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue SA Pty Ltd 
is a company registered by The Republic of South Africa and is traded under 
license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is a registered trademark.
This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended 
solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or 
opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily 
represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or related companies. If you are not the 
intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based upon 
its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you 
believe you have received this email in error.



-Original Message-
From: Erik Weber [mailto:terbol...@gmail.com]
Sent: 16 March 2016 13:20
To: dev >; 
us...@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: [POLL] Interest for EU based event/collab

[Cross posted to users@ and dev@]

As you may be aware, a conference has been announced in Brazil later this year.

I guess there are more than me having a hard time travelling that far and long, 
so I would like to check the interest for an EU based event.

Unless someone comes up with a big money jar it won't be as fancy as the 
previous ones.

If you could fill out this poll[1] and/or respond to this email, that would be 
great.

[1] https://no.surveymonkey.com/r/CX3K5T3


--
Erik
Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services:
IaaS Cloud Design & Build | 
CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework
CloudStack Consulting | 
CloudStack Software 
Engineering
CloudStack Infrastructure 
Support | CloudStack 
Bootcamp Training Courses




--

This email was Virus checked by UTM 9. http://www.sophos.com

Re: [VOTE] Move 'apache/cloudstack' -> 'apache-cloudstack/cloudstack'

[ilya]

+1 Binding.

I dont see anything wrong with this approach especially if it helps to
solve our backlog issue.

On 3/18/16 3:44 PM, Will Stevens wrote:
> We are discussing this proposal in 3 or 4 threads, so I will not try to
> recap everything.  Instead I will try to give a brief overview of the
> problem and a proposal for solving it.
> 
> *Problem:*
> The Apache CloudStack community needs additional github permissions in
> order to integrate CI for the purpose of maintaining code quality.  The ASF
> does not have enough granular control via the 'apache' github organization
> to give the 'apache/cloudstack' repository the needed permissions.
> 
> *Proposal:*
> Transfer ownership of the 'apache/cloudstack' mirrored repository out of
> the 'apache' github organization into the 'apache-cloudstack' github
> organization (which I have already setup and started inviting users to).
> Both members of the ACS community and the ASF board will have 'owner'
> permissions on this new organization.  This will allow for permissions to
> be applied specifically to the 'apache-cloudstack' organization and not
> have to be applied to the entire 'apache' organization.
> 
> By transferring ownership, all of the PRs will be copied to the new
> repository and redirects will be created on github from 'apache/cloudstack'
> to 'apache-cloudstack/cloudstack'.
> 
> The developer workflow and commit workflow will remain unchanged.  The
> canonical ASF repository (git://git.apache.org/cloudstack.git) will remain
> the source of truth and commits will be made to that repository.
> 
> Please ask if anything is unclear or needs to be better defined in order
> for you to cast a vote.
> 

[VOTE] Move 'apache/cloudstack' -> 'apache-cloudstack/cloudstack'

[Will Stevens]

We are discussing this proposal in 3 or 4 threads, so I will not try to
recap everything.  Instead I will try to give a brief overview of the
problem and a proposal for solving it.

*Problem:*
The Apache CloudStack community needs additional github permissions in
order to integrate CI for the purpose of maintaining code quality.  The ASF
does not have enough granular control via the 'apache' github organization
to give the 'apache/cloudstack' repository the needed permissions.

*Proposal:*
Transfer ownership of the 'apache/cloudstack' mirrored repository out of
the 'apache' github organization into the 'apache-cloudstack' github
organization (which I have already setup and started inviting users to).
Both members of the ACS community and the ASF board will have 'owner'
permissions on this new organization.  This will allow for permissions to
be applied specifically to the 'apache-cloudstack' organization and not
have to be applied to the entire 'apache' organization.

By transferring ownership, all of the PRs will be copied to the new
repository and redirects will be created on github from 'apache/cloudstack'
to 'apache-cloudstack/cloudstack'.

The developer workflow and commit workflow will remain unchanged.  The
canonical ASF repository (git://git.apache.org/cloudstack.git) will remain
the source of truth and commits will be made to that repository.

Please ask if anything is unclear or needs to be better defined in order
for you to cast a vote.

Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)

[Jim Jagielski]

That sounds like a cop-out to me related to what's really going
on.

> On Mar 17, 2016, at 12:03 PM, Tutkowski, Mike  
> wrote:
> 
> As far as I understand, cloudstack/cloudstack is only being proposed to help 
> with developer workflow and CI.
> 
> To my understanding, all code that goes in there will end up back in the 
> canonical ASF CloudStack repo (and, as such, be mirrored to 
> apache/cloudstack).
> 
> This is simply a workaround to help solve developer workflow and CI issues 
> that we couldn't due to lack of privileges on the current repo.
> 
> I do not believe anyone on the PMC is talking about forking CloudStack and 
> going off in a different direction.
> 
> From: Chris Mattmann 
> Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2016 9:52 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull 
> request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)
> 
> Hi Sebastien,
> 
> 
> [..]
>>> 
>>> Hi Sebastien,
>>> 
>>> Thanks for your reply and yes, I am a member of the ASF board.
>>> 
>>> The thing is, there was already some discussion of this at the
>>> ASF board meeting that happened yesterday. I can tell you that
>>> there were more than a few board members that were a bit concerned
>>> at the prospect of Apache Cloudstack forking and starting a new
>>> GitHub organization, so I’m here now to discuss.
>> 
>> We are not forking. In the sense that the canonical repo is at the ASF
>> and mirrored on apache/cloudstack.
> 
> OK, good though based on the rest of your replies, I actually see
> the opposite being said. Also “we” is the relative word here, which
> I’ll get back to later in this message.
> 
>> 
>> The cloudstack org on github existed and was empty, one of us contacted
>> github and we got the “control” of it.
>> 
>>> 
>>> I’m sorry that you are unhappy with the lack of access to GitHub
>>> facilities, however I’m confused, the ASF does provide mirroring,
>>> active GitHub issue,
>> 
>> As far as I know we cannot use github issues.
>> [..snip..]
>> To close PRs you need to make a commit.
> [..snip..]
>> Be able to use labels
>> Be able to setup our own triggers/hooks
> 
> David Nalley can speak to this as I’m not sure if you can or
> cannot or if infra@ is providing this. Thanks for stating this.
> 
>> 
>> 
>>> PMC desires and if so can you state that? I remember seeing a request
>>> that you wanted the ability to close pull requests and to be part of
>>> the experiment going on with the Whimsy PMC -
>> 
>> Indeed, and I (we) never heard back.
> 
> Right - that’s probably b/c it wasn’t discussed with the board
> until our last meeting which just happened yesterday. It’s
> my reading of the tea leaves that the experiment, while considered
> going in the right direction with Whimsy, is not open to other
> PMCs. It’s possible that we may as a board decide that further
> response is needed, but until that happens or if that doesn’t happen
> you can take my response until then.
> 
>> [..snip..]
> 
>> 
>>> The other thing is - is the new Cloudstack GitHub organization the
>>> result of a subset of the PMC going off and doing this -
>> 
>> I am not sure why you say subset. Let’s try to avoid polemics.
> 
> I’m not trying to attack.
> 
> I asked a simple question - how many/who in the Apache CloudStack PMC
> is intent on using this new Cloudstack GitHub organization? Not an
> attack, a question that I still don’t have an answer to.
> 
> I also wanted to gauge whether there are others on the PMC that will
> speak up. I’ll continue waiting to hear more about that.
> 
>> [..snip..]
>> Again, this is not about leaving the ASF. This is about accessing
>> productive tools and making use of them to their fullest.
>> 
>>> Finally, as for the Apache Cloudstack PMC - for the PMC the policy of
>>> the ASF is that the canonical repository at the moment is on ASF
>>> hardware.
>> 
>> And we would like the ASF to reconsider this.
> 
> Put bluntly, the decision is no, and it is in the hands of the ASF Infra@
> and based on
> discussions I’ve seen on public lists there and on board@ and part of the
> board
> meeting yesterday, Infra@ is not opening up the Whimsy experiment to other
> PMCs
> as of yet. They aren’t ready to declare an SLA; they aren’t ready for
> potential
> other PMCs to ask to use it too and for others to start thinking that
> capability
> is anything near operational. David Nalley can fill in more.
> 
>> 
>>> There are not any approved policies for external forks being the
>>> canonical
>>> repo, especially those in another GitHub organization not managed by the
>>> ASF. There is an experiment in the Apache Whimsy PMC to experiment with
>>> GitHub as the canonical repo for an apache/* org project. That is still
>>> an
>>> experiment and not widely offered by ASF infra to all PMCs.
>>> 
>> 
>> Are other projects than Whimsy being allowed to experiment ?
> 
> Not at this time.

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: OSPF: adding dynamically routing capabili...

[agneya2001]

Github user agneya2001 commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1371#issuecomment-198251894
  
Documentation PR is here 
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-docs-admin/pull/36


---
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 enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---