Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

, 27 April, 2016 10:59:37 > Subject: Re: PRs for 4.9 Release > Thanks, created > > https://github.com/NuxRo/cloudstack/pull/1 > > -- > Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! > > Nux! > www.nux.ro > > - Original Message - >

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

, 27 April, 2016 09:09:26 > Subject: Re: PRs for 4.9 Release > Let's make this your first PR Lucian ;-) > > You can do it! Let me know if you need help :-) > > Regards, Remi > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On 27 Apr 2016, at 10:06, Nux! <n...@li.nux.ro> wrote

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

gt;> From: "Will Stevens" <williamstev...@gmail.com> >> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org >> Sent: Thursday, 7 April, 2016 17:15:38 >> Subject: PRs for 4.9 Release > >> I know this is not how this usually works, but I need to crowd source some >> info to be more effe

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

- > From: "Will Stevens" <williamstev...@gmail.com> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Sent: Thursday, 7 April, 2016 17:15:38 > Subject: PRs for 4.9 Release > I know this is not how this usually works, but I need to crowd source some > info to be more effective. >

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 6:15 PM, Will Stevens wrote: > I know this is not how this usually works, but I need to crowd source some > info to be more effective. > > I am slowly getting things rolling for the 4.9 release. My CI is chugging > away and I have a queue of PRs

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

gt; > > > - Original Message ----- > > > From: "Will Stevens" <williamstev...@gmail.com> > > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > > > Sent: Thursday, 7 April, 2016 17:15:38 > > > Subject: PRs for 4.9 Release > > > > > I kn

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

logy! > > Nux! > www.nux.ro > > - Original Message - > > From: "Will Stevens" <williamstev...@gmail.com> > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > > Sent: Thursday, 7 April, 2016 17:15:38 > > Subject: PRs for 4.9 Release > > > I know

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

--- > From: "Will Stevens" <williamstev...@gmail.com> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Sent: Thursday, 7 April, 2016 17:15:38 > Subject: PRs for 4.9 Release > I know this is not how this usually works, but I need to crowd source some > info to be more effective. > &

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

Thank you sir. I have added it to my queue. :) *Will STEVENS* Lead Developer *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 3:04 PM, Remi Bergsma wrote: > Hi Will, >

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

Hi Will, I’d propose to test this one as it fixes a nasty concurrency issue. I runs on prod at SBP for some time now so I’m quite sure it’s solid but let’s run the tests again to be sure. https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1470 Regards, Remi On 08/04/16 20:56,

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

Thanks for the items syed. I have added them to my active list. *Will STEVENS* Lead Developer *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:32 PM, Syed Mushtaq wrote: >

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

Hi Will, Thanks for all the effort you've put into getting the PRs moving. This is huge for the community. >From my side, I have these two PRs which I think are critical as they fix broken functionality. https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1423 : This fixes client side VPN failure due to

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

If you are using bubble, here are a few more 'tweaks'. The 'bubble-blueprint' is missing the following, so you will need to do the following after you run it: $ systemctl stop firewalld $ systemctl disable firewalld Also, if you are using a static IP, you will have to manually add the following

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

For those interested: Fred and I have some adjustments for Fedora and as Cloudstack we need to remain at java 1.7 for now while the SBP guys are ahead of us at 1.8. On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 10:30 PM, Remi Bergsma wrote: > Great to see more and more people use the

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

Great to see more and more people use the bubbles! Setting up: https://github.com/MissionCriticalCloud/bubble-blueprint Using: https://github.com/MissionCriticalCloud/bubble-toolkit Happy testing :-) Regards, Remi > On 07 Apr 2016, at 19:56, Will Stevens wrote: > >

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

Yes, we'll be testing these on real hardware. From: williamstev...@gmail.com <williamstev...@gmail.com> on behalf of Will Stevens <wstev...@cloudops.com> Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2016 12:59 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: PRs for

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

___ > From: Rafael Weingärtner <rafaelweingart...@gmail.com> > Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2016 11:48 AM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: PRs for 4.9 Release > > Hi Will, thanks for such a great job. > I was going over the PRs we ha

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

If you want me to verify things in your env, you can send me a tmate and I can have a look. *Will STEVENS* Lead Developer *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 1:54 PM,

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

yes, makes perfect sense. I skipped 1326 for now, I just tried to build 1436 it fails in the rpm build fase. I am now going to try that ui thing to build confidence in my test environment. On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:49 PM, Rafael Weingärtner < rafaelweingart...@gmail.com> wrote: > Sure it makes. >

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

ärtner <rafaelweingart...@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2016 11:48 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: PRs for 4.9 Release Hi Will, thanks for such a great job. I was going over the PRs we have in our merge list; I did a walk through till page 5, the others one I believe will require more w

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

Sure it makes. On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 2:47 PM, Will Stevens wrote: > Yes, if the PR is ONLY a test and does not touch any other code then we can > only run that test. I agree with you. > > If any code is changed outside the test, I always run the full suite. Make >

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

Yes, if the PR is ONLY a test and does not touch any other code then we can only run that test. I agree with you. If any code is changed outside the test, I always run the full suite. Make sense? *Will STEVENS* Lead Developer *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|*

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

running a new test in an environment should pass but should not require all other test being re-validated. SO what is the point of running all others? I am not saying we shouldn't regularly run all tests but in this case it adds no value AFAICT. On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:35 PM, Will Stevens

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

Yes, I agree we only need to run tests against the branch it was created on. It probably SHOULD be done against all branches it will be merged into, but we need to have things streamlined a bit more for that to be viable IMO. *Will STEVENS* Lead Developer *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

I also had problems with 1459, but I was trying to run 4 CIs in the same bubble, so I thought it may have had something to do with that. I want to run it on its own so I don't have resource contention to make sure the tests are actually failing. *Will STEVENS* Lead Developer *CloudOps* *|

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

Yes, I want to run tests against the tests. I have found issues in some of the tests not working as expected, so I add the test to the run and run them. I think it is worth it because then we know the test is valid later. I would rather have the author fix the test now if there are problems

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

IMO, we only need to run the test and check if it works against the branch that it was created upon. On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 2:30 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote: > 1326 is just a test. it does not touch production code. Do we run > regression tests against such PRs. seems a

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

1326 is just a test. it does not touch production code. Do we run regression tests against such PRs. seems a waste to me. On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:27 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:26 PM, Daan Hoogland > wrote: > >> 1326

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:26 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote: > 1326 - master (*pending CI) ​starting​ -- Daan

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

i just finished redoing 1459 but the first 5 tests failed so i aborted and am looking for a new target On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:24 PM, Will Stevens wrote: > Thanks Daan. I really wish I had the ability to label PRs because that > would make things SO much easier. > > I

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

Thanks Daan. I really wish I had the ability to label PRs because that would make things SO much easier. I have these 3 pending CI, all of which need changes the the ' helper_scripts/cloudstack/run_marvin_router_tests.sh' because they are PRs on tests, so we have to explicitly add the test to

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

Thanks Rafael. I have 1/2 of those on my watch list, so I will review the ones I am not already actively working on. *Will STEVENS* Lead Developer *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

will, Fred Neubauer just helped me finalize my test environment on a fedora laptop. I will be chipping away at the pile as well. hopefully at a rate of one per day. I would like your directions as to which I can pick. of course I can go my own way but double work is a shame. On Thu, Apr 7, 2016

Re: PRs for 4.9 Release

Hi Will, thanks for such a great job. I was going over the PRs we have in our merge list; I did a walk through till page 5, the others one I believe will require more work and some of the folks that have opened them, are a little bit off the community lately. I found the following to be of some

PRs for 4.9 Release

I know this is not how this usually works, but I need to crowd source some info to be more effective. I am slowly getting things rolling for the 4.9 release. My CI is chugging away and I have a queue of PRs to get tested, so I will be getting through them as quickly as I can. I have finally