+1 (binding)
Ran the verification scripts to verify the build, signatures, etc, and that
the contents of the releases are correct.
On Mon, Mar 4, 2024 at 7:30 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> It looks good to me.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On Sun, Mar 3, 2024 at 9:09 AM Andrew Gaul
Unfortunately, I don't know... I'd say I probably trust more the GH Actions
setup than the Jenkins one... I vaguely remember how that wan was
configured, and the nits int he different JVMs that were available in that
environment.
On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 7:24 AM Andrew Gaul wrote:
> This is
FWIW, this is the complete discussion:
https://lists.apache.org/thread/w61gzk2ohjtshbwcb5gy6wb2htv7fo0x
It was actually cross-posted to the Brooklyn dev list [1] and some of
the PMC members there expressed their opinion.
We are, however, somehow blocked by inaction and I honestly don't know
what
Forwarding with the jclouds users list address fixed
On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 10:15 AM Ignasi Barrera wrote:
> Hi!
>
> This is a call to action for everyone that expressed interest in helping
> keep the project alive.
> There has been a concrete request for hel
Hi!
This is a call to action for everyone that expressed interest in helping
keep the project alive.
There has been a concrete request for help here:
https://lists.apache.org/thread/z7lg1y0rjp2xlkxhkkg76190tx2lznjt
Who can take it?
On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 6:26 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré
can't speak on their behalf, but I assume Pulsar and Brooklyng guys
> (at least) want to maintain jclouds alive as dependency.
>
> Personally, I prefer to find other approaches (and it's what we do in
> Apache Sunny and Apache Karaf).
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On Fri, Dec 9
lyn (or another project) will do a fork probably.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 3:38 PM Ignasi Barrera wrote:
> >
> > I agree with Gaul's comments.
> >
> > If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens ;)
> > >
>
I agree with Gaul's comments.
If people wants to help, worth to see if it actually happens ;)
>
It's been 2 months since the proposal of retiring the project and to date,
nothing real happened beyond "I'm in" comments.
If at the time of discussing the project retirement, this is all the energy
Thanks for starting this thread Gaul!
+1 to move the project to the Attic if there is no active community anymore,
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 3:03 PM Andrew Gaul wrote:
> jclouds development has slowed from 123 commits from 26 contributors in
> 2018 to just 24 from 6 contributors in 2022. This
That looks good. Thanks! PR would be very welcome!
On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 9:46 AM DImuthu Upeksha
wrote:
> Seems like V3AuthenticationApi does not have an implementation for access
> key authentication so the invocation routes to the base interface which
> does not have any HTTP annotation. I
I just executed it and worked for me...
I just did a:
make image
make publish
Anyway, it should be published now :D
On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 2:02 PM Andrew Gaul wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2022 at 11:19:15PM +0900, Andrew Gaul wrote:
> > This thread is for discussion of the first release
+1
Verification checklist (some are verified by the verification scripts,
others are manual verifications):
* Checksums are valid
* Signatures are valid
* The expanded source archive builds and passes tests
* All files have license headers where appropriate
* Expanded source archives match the
I agree on not including labs providers in jclouds releases anymore
and just publishing the snapshots.
If anyone is interested in promoting a provider, pull requests are
welcome to have them moved to the main repository!
On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 11:40 AM Ignasi Barrera
wrote:
>
> +1
>
+1
On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 7:46 AM Andrew Gaul wrote:
>
> I opened https://github.com/apache/jclouds/pull/127 to move the glacier
> provider to main repo. I propose removing all the labs integration from
> the release process which means the following will only publish as
> SNAPSHOTs:
>
>
Thanks for dealing with this Andrew G.!!
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 1:41 PM Andrew Gaul wrote:
>
> The Apache jclouds team is pleased to announce the release of jclouds
> 2.4.0.
>
> Apache jclouds is an open source multi-cloud toolkit for the Java
> platform that gives you the freedom to create
+1
Verification checklist (some are verified by the verification scripts,
others are manual verifications):
* Checksums are valid
* Signatures are valid
* The expanded source archive builds and passes tests
* All files have license headers where appropriate
* Expanded source archives match the
Agree to remove it unless there is explicit interest in it!
On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 2:34 PM Andrew Phillips
wrote:
> > If no one else volunteers to fix this I suggest that we remove it.
>
> +1 to removing unless someone is interested in getting it working.
>
> Thanks for suggesting this, Andrew
I've done a small change to the javadoc publish script and uploaded the
javadocs.
@gaul, mind checking if you have the snapshot change locally already and
push it?
On Sun, Mar 7, 2021, 17:03 Ignasi Barrera wrote:
> I'm not very familiar with the javadoc thing, but I'll try to have a l
I'm not very familiar with the javadoc thing, but I'll try to have a look
at it during the week.
Regarding the next snapshot, the release script should have already bumped
it and the status of the local master branch where you ran the release
should already have those commits.
On Sun, Mar 7,
+1
Verification checklist (some are verified by the verification scripts,
others are manual verifications):
* Checksums are valid
* Signatures are valid
* The expanded source archive builds and passes tests
* All files have license headers where appropriate
* Expanded source archives match the
On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 10:00 AM Jean-Noël Rouvignac (ForgeRock) <
jean-noel.rouvig...@forgerock.com> wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I am coming back on this subject that I originally suggested here:
> https://github.com/apache/jclouds/pull/93#issuecomment-762705311
>
> Here is my original message:
> > BTW
Ok, since there seems to be consensus I'll go ahead and add the resolution
in this month's board agenda so that we can have the change done in this
very next board meeting.
Thx!
On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 4:47 PM Alex Heneveld wrote:
>
> +1 & TY!
>
> On 11/01/2021 14:40, Andrew Phillips wrote:
>
Hi!
It's been a while since my availability and the cycles I have to contribute
to the project as decreased significantly, and I think it would better
serve the project if someone more active than me could be the project chair.
Andrew Gaul. is quite more active and involved in the project than I
Sounds good to me! I may have some cycles as well to help move some of the
open PRs to completion.
Thanks for taking the lead on this!
On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 5:50 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofre wrote:
> +1 for 2.3.0 release. I will take a look on the SNAPSHOT.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> > Le 2 déc. 2020 à
Hi!
I've just accessed the Jenkins instance to do a small fix to a build and
saw a notice that it is being terminated and that all jobs need to be
migrated to a new instance.
The message below got unnoticed to me, but the current Jenkins will be
terminated in 2 weeks from now and the jobs need
t;
> Original Message
> Subject: jclouds Board Report due by Wed Jul 8th - Initial Reminder
> Date: 2020-06-29 20:17
> From: "Roy T. Fielding"
> To: Ignasi Barrera
> Copy: priv...@jclouds.apache.org
> Reply-To: priv...@jclouds.apache.org
>
&g
The open PRs in both old repos have nor received feedback recently. I
guess we can at least move forward and archive the remaining
jclouds/jclouds and jclouds/jclouds-labs?
On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 4:16 PM Andrew Gaul wrote:
>
> We used jclouds/jclouds before moving to the Apache Foundation. We
>
Yay! Thanks @gaul!
On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 3:47 PM Andrew Gaul wrote:
>
> The vote is now closed, and with 3 binding +1s, we're ready to release.
>
> On Sat, May 02, 2020 at 07:33:38PM +0900, Andrew Gaul wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > This is the first release candidate for Apache jclouds 2.2.1.
> >
Many thanks for cutting the release!
Before formally announcing the release once the vote passes, would you
have time to work on the release notes for the website?
On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 12:34 PM Andrew Gaul wrote:
>
> This thread is for discussion of the first release candidate for
> Apache
+1
Verification checklist (some are verified by the verification scripts,
others are manual verifications):
* Checksums are valid
* Signatures are valid
* The expanded source archive builds and passes tests
* All files have license headers where appropriate
* Expanded source archives match the
In general, I agree.
Moving to newer Java versions is a must, and also a requirement to
upgrade Guava, Guice, and Gson to newer versions, which are the main
dependencies we have.
Guava and Gson were challenging because there were some
backward-incompatible changes with OSGi, as they made some
Without having went into details here... Could properly fixing
https://github.com/apache/jclouds/pull/63 resolve the issue then?
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 4:26 PM Andrew Gaul wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 11:15:48PM +0900, Andrew Gaul wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 08:39:01PM +0900, Andrew
+1. Go for it!
On Sun, Apr 26, 2020, 19:01 Andrew Phillips wrote:
> > I propose releasing 2.2.1 in next week since it has been 6 months since
> 2.2.0.
>
> +1 - thanks for suggesting this! Should be able to help with release
> testing if needed, too.
>
> Have a good Sunday, everyone!
>
> ap
>
Thanks Andrew :D I've updated it and will be sending it in a bit
On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 2:51 PM Andrew Phillips
wrote:
> Hi all
>
> A quick follow-up here, in case anyone has anything they'd like to add -
> the report submission is technically already a little overdue (meeting
> itself is next
The Apache jclouds team is pleased to announce the release of jclouds 2.1.3.
Apache jclouds is an open source multi-cloud toolkit for the Java
platform that gives you the freedom to create applications that are
portable across clouds while giving you full control to use
cloud-specific features.
1:03PM +0200, Ignasi Barrera wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > This is the first release candidate for Apache jclouds 2.1.3.
> >
> > Please use the separate [DISCUSS] thread for anything but votes.
> >
> > It fixes the following issues:
> >
> https://issue
t 13, 2019 at 04:08:53PM +0200, Ignasi Barrera wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > This is the first release candidate for Apache jclouds 2.2.0.
> >
> > Please use the separate [DISCUSS] thread for anything but votes.
> >
> > It fixes the following issues:
> >
Hi!
Now that we're releasing 2.2.0, and will move master to 2.3.0-SNAPSHOT
and create the 2.2.x branch, I think we should assume the EOL of the
2.1.x branch and do not cherry-pick issues there unless they are
critical security issues.
This is usually what we do, we keep the last *.x" branch and
the contents of the RC tags
* All LICENSE and NOTICE files are present and correct (verified manually)
* There are no binary files bundled in the source archives (manually
looked tor exe, bin, tar and zip files)
On Sun, 13 Oct 2019 at 22:21, Ignasi Barrera wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> This
This thread is for discussion of the first release candidate for
Apache jclouds 2.1.3.
Please use this thread for discussion of issues uncovered in the RC,
questions you may have about the RC, etc.
If you want to help to validate the release, you'll find a set of
scripts and the corresponding
Hello,
This is the first release candidate for Apache jclouds 2.1.3.
Please use the separate [DISCUSS] thread for anything but votes.
It fixes the following issues:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=12344941=Html=12314430
*** Please download, test and vote by
the contents of the RC tags
* All LICENSE and NOTICE files are present and correct (verified manually)
* There are no binary files bundled in the source archives (manually
looked tor exe, bin, tar and zip files)
On Sun, 13 Oct 2019 at 16:08, Ignasi Barrera wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> This
This thread is for discussion of the first release candidate for
Apache jclouds 2.2.0.
Please use this thread for discussion of issues uncovered in the RC,
questions you may have about the RC, etc.
If you want to help to validate the release, you'll find a set of
scripts and the corresponding
Done and sent.
On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 at 16:00, Andrea Turli (apache.org) <
andreatu...@apache.org> wrote:
> Thanks Andrew,
>
> I don’t have many spare cycles these days, unfortunately, so I’d really
> appreciate some help.
>
> Thanks
>
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 2:52 AM Andrew Phillips
> wrote:
>
>
res are weird, it seems that the ETag is not a multipart and
> instead a full part. Maybe some issue storing xattr? I think it is OK
> to release without this since filesystem is usually used for testing.
>
> On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 02:58:10PM +0200, Ignasi Barrera wrote:
> > I only ha
system
> or blobstore changes in git log since 2.1.2. Perhaps JVM versions
> influence this?
>
> On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 12:30:27PM +0200, Ignasi Barrera wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > I was about to cut the jclouds release, and when building everything I've
> > found the follow
Hi!
I was about to cut the jclouds release, and when building everything I've
found the following failures in the filesystem integration tests.
They seem to only appear in OSX:
---
Test set: TestSuite
Hi!
We have several users waiting for a release.
WDYT about cutting the next 2.1.x release next week? I'm quite busy this
week but next one I can cut it. Will there be energy and availability to
vote it? :)
I.
as been done. It required a change in repositories name.
>
> We now have:
>
> karaf-jclouds
> karaf-jclouds-cli
>
> I'm preparing PR to update the pom and upgrade to Karaf 4.2, and also
> updating Karaf website and I'm preparing an announcement e-mail.
>
> Thanks !
> Regards
I've just created the INFRA ticket to get the transfer done:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-18342
On Tue, 30 Apr 2019 at 08:38, Ignasi Barrera wrote:
>
> Thanks, JB! :)
>
> Please, share the INFRA ticket here so we can also track it.
>
> On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 at 07
iel Estévez
> > danielestevez.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 06 May 2019 04:55:43 -0400 Ignasi Barrera
> wrote
> >
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >> Now that we have an agreement that jclouds-karaf and jclouds-cli will
> be
>
ganise it in that way?
>
> Best
>
>
> On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 10:55 AM Ignasi Barrera wrote:
>
> > Hi!
> >
> > Now that we have an agreement that jclouds-karaf and jclouds-cli will be
> > transferred to the Apache Karaf project, I think we are unb
Hi!
Now that we have an agreement that jclouds-karaf and jclouds-cli will be
transferred to the Apache Karaf project, I think we are unblocked to
complete the JDK 8 support (initial issue here [1]).
So... let's do that? It should also help unblock several issues we have
about using old versions
Thanks, JB! :)
Please, share the INFRA ticket here so we can also track it.
On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 at 07:57, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this vote passed with only +1.
>
> I will deal with INFRA to change the management group on jclouds-karaf
> and jclouds-cli git repo.
>
> As soon as
I think it makes sense to remove it. Thanks!
On Sun, 28 Apr 2019 at 17:04, Olaf Flebbe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am about to update the maven structure of jclouds and got in serious
> trouble
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-1497 <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-1497>
Looks like there are no negative votes and feedback till now has been
positive. Can we consider the vote finished and proceed with the home
change?
On Thu, Apr 18, 2019, 21:11 Achim Nierbeck
wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> makes sense.
>
> Am Do., 18. Apr. 2019 um 09:13 Uhr schrieb Andrew Gaul :
>
>
That looks like a reasonable fix. Would you like to try opening a PR to fix
that?
On Fri, 19 Apr 2019 at 00:38, ahsankhanm...@gmail.com <
ahsankhanm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In the code
>
What do you mean when you say k8s integration with jclouds? Are you talking
about using jclouds to provision a kubernetes cluster? (that is the infra,
nodes, etc?) Or are you talking about some kind of orchestration APIs to
manage kubernetes, pods, deployments, etc?
On Thu, 11 Apr 2019 at 16:20,
+1
On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 at 17:15, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Some days ago we discussed on the Apache jClouds dev mailing list about
> moving the jclouds-karaf and jclouds-cli project under the Karaf project
> governance, as it's hard for the jClouds community to maintain them.
>
>
I've added some stuff there. Please, fix/amend as appropriate.
On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 at 02:07, Andrea Turli wrote:
> Thanks Andrew, completely forgot about it!
>
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 7:28 AM Andrew Phillips
> wrote:
>
> > > The meeting is scheduled for Wed, 17 Apr 2019 at 10:30 PDT and the
I will start those actions.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 09/04/2019 21:39, Andrea Turli wrote:
> > I think it makes sense to me as well. How would you migrate this?
> > Deprecating the project in Gitbox/Github and promoting the new repo so
> that
> > downstream proje
> >>>
> >>>> Am 09.04.2019 um 07:46 schrieb Francois Papon <
> francois.pa...@openobject.fr>:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi JB,
> >>>>
> >>>> I think it make sense to move it as a Karaf subproject as we started
>
I totally agree with Andrew's point, but we need to be careful when
deprecating this. There are projects that rely on our OSGi support (take
Apache Brooklyn IIRC as an example), and we don't want to leave them
orphan, at least with a clear direction and position from jclouds.
The only real reason
Also, in the past, we have overcome issues like this by providing our
custom bundles for the Karaf features [1] or have repackaged the
conflicting libraries using the maven-shade-plugin. It is not an ideal
solution and the last option, but it is worth knowing things like these
have been done in
>> On 20/11/2018 06:17, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi Ignasi,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks for the reminder ;)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I did some improvements in Karaf 4.2.2-SNAPSHOT to speed up jc
Also jclouds should already support the 307 redirect. All 3xx response
codes are intercepted here [1], then processed, by default (unless a
provider defines its own redirection retry handler) here [2].
In general, the preconditions for a 307 request to be retried by jclouds
are:
* It must be
I'm on it. Builds should be back to green in a while.
On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 at 08:07, Ignasi Barrera wrote:
> Ah, that old annoying thing.
>
> This issue tracks this: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-104
>
> The problem is the "javadoc:aggregate" goal from the
Ah, that old annoying thing.
This issue tracks this: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-104
The problem is the "javadoc:aggregate" goal from the "-Pdoc" profile (which
we only run in CI).
It is defined in the root pom.xml (the parent one) but it depends on all
projects, that haven't
Yeah! This was a smooth one.
Thanks!
I.
On Thu, Feb 7, 2019, 00:17 Andrew Gaul The Apache jclouds team is pleased to announce the release of jclouds
> 2.1.2.
>
> Apache jclouds is an open source multi-cloud toolkit for the Java
> platform that gives you the freedom to create applications that
t; On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 10:27:40PM +0100, Ignasi Barrera wrote:
> > Ok, I see it's not just a typo int he tag, but it includes all the
> commits.
> > WIll also comment that. I don't think it is a big issue, as they'll be
> > detached commits when the tag is removed and should b
really need to.
In any case this shouldn't be blocking the release, right? :)
On Wed, 6 Feb 2019 at 22:24, Ignasi Barrera wrote:
> Just to confirm, it is just a matter of that "extra" tag being there. The
> correct tag is there and all other tags in each repo are correct too?
>
&
Just to confirm, it is just a matter of that "extra" tag being there. The
correct tag is there and all other tags in each repo are correct too?
On Wed, 6 Feb 2019 at 22:19, Ignasi Barrera
wrote:
> The problem with the `rel/` prefixed tags is that they can't be removed
> (IIRC th
The problem with the `rel/` prefixed tags is that they can't be removed
(IIRC that wes something infra set up intentionally some time ago). I'll
ask on the ASF infra channel in Slack and see.
On Wed, 6 Feb 2019 at 22:14, Valentin Aitken wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Could you try simple
> git push
I've started the release notes for 2.1.2:
https://github.com/apache/jclouds-site/pull/5
Please, contribute directly to that branch.
Keep in mind that now that we are on GitBox, we can use GitHub normally.
Create branches directly in GitHub, etc, etc. Let's do that and contribute
your stuff to the
+1
Before sending the announce email, we need the release notes page and the
downloads one already deployed. Otherwise, the email gets moderated, so
before actually releasing, we should work on the release notes page.
Run the verification scripts to check the following:
* Checksums are valid
*
pull requests to some
> resolution.
>
> On Sun, Feb 03, 2019 at 08:59:04PM +0100, Ignasi Barrera wrote:
> > And finally, all the pull request builds are working now on the Apache
> org.
> > YAY!
> >
> > I plan to progressively archive all the repos in the legac
if you prefer.
Cheers!
I.
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 17:42, Ignasi Barrera wrote:
> The PR builds don't seem to work. I've filed an infra ticket to track it:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-17687
>
> On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 at 11:14, Andrea Turli wrote:
>
>&g
l submit it
> soon
> >>> (tomorrow or the day after probably).
> >>>
> >>> For the "provisioning" proposal, I'm still have work to do but it's on
> >>> the right way to be discussed.
> >>>
> >>> Sorry for the
Thanks Gaul!
Let's get 2.1.2 out. Count on me to help with the release
On Mon, Jan 28, 2019, 20:38 Jean-Baptiste Onofré I'm tackling the Karaf part. Can I have couple of days to finalize this ?
>
> Thanks,
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 28/01/2019 20:12, Andrew Gaul wrote:
> > We have not had a release
gt; > >
> > > Thanks again for the hard work,
> > > Andrea
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 10:52 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> I will.
> > >>
> > &g
Hi!
Thanks for being working on this and sharing your issues. Do you have your
changes in a GitHub branch or somewhere we could have a look, to try find
where the problem can be?
Thanks!
I.
On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 15:54, aliaksandra.kharus...@gmail.com <
aliaksandra.kharus...@gmail.com>
The problem here is the use of the location properties.
Those properties are used to "whitelist" which regions the provider will
consider. They are usually to avoid the provider contact regions you're not
interested in. By default, when the jclouds compute service lists nodes,
etc, it fetches
> >
> > I keep you posted.
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > On 10/01/2019 10:29, Ignasi Barrera wrote:
> > > We also have to fix the PR builds. Now that we are in the Apache org we
> > > should change them to use the "GitHub PR build&quo
R and keep closing/opening
it to test? :)
On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 16:05, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Thanks (I was about updating the permission ;)) !
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 07/01/2019 16:03, Ignasi Barrera wrote:
> > Fixed. You should be able to edit it now.
> &g
gt; JB
>
> On 05/01/2019 10:52, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > Added to my to do ;)
> >
> > Thanks
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > Le 5 janv. 2019 à 10:31, à 10:31, Ignasi Barrera a
> écrit:
> >> Go for it!
> >>
> >> Mind
grated to gitbox.
> > >
> > > I'm now updating pom scm and contribution guide.
> > >
> > > @Ignasi: do you tackle the Jenkins update or may I ?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Regards
> > > JB
> > >
> > > On 05/01/2019
When you're done I'll take care of updating the Jenkins builds
On Sat, Jan 5, 2019, 10:31 Ignasi Barrera Go for it!
>
> Mind updating the committers guide when you're done?
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/JCLOUDS/Committers+Guide
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 3, 2019, 1
Go for it!
Mind updating the committers guide when you're done?
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/JCLOUDS/Committers+Guide
On Thu, Jan 3, 2019, 14:28 Jean-Baptiste Onofré I'm volunteer to deal with the move to gitbox. If there's no opposition, I
> will start the process over the
Hi!
I'll be attending KubeCon this week. If anyone is there, it would be great
to catch up! :)
I.
Hi Fritz,
That is indeed a real issue, and the main blocker to have it implemented is
the availability of volunteer time to develop that. Currently, no one in
the jclouds team is actually paid to work on jclouds. The project is a 100%
volunteer effort, which makes it difficult to commit to
PR support. So, it would allow us to
> use a specific Jenkins build on PR with notification directly in the PR.
> I'm proposing to create this job just after the gitbox move.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 07/12/2018 23:41, Ignasi Barrera wrote:
> > No, I mean the Jenkins migr
me to move forward on this ?
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 07/12/2018 18:16, Ignasi Barrera wrote:
> > +1!
> >
> > This was already discussed and was the next step once we had our CI moved
> > to the ASF Jenkins.
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 7, 2018, 18:07 Jean-Bap
+1!
This was already discussed and was the next step once we had our CI moved
to the ASF Jenkins.
On Fri, Dec 7, 2018, 18:07 Jean-Baptiste Onofré Hi all,
>
> our repositories are currently located on git-wip-us.apache.org.
>
> This service will be decommissioned in the coming months.
>
> I
apis/ec2/src/main/java/org/jclouds/ec2/domain/InstanceType.java
> 3.
> providers/aws-ec2/src/main/java/org/jclouds/aws/ec2/compute/suppliers/AWSEC2HardwareSupplier.java
>
> On 2018/11/21 23:13:58, Ignasi Barrera wrote:
> > HI Kazim,
> >
> > The best way to move f
I,ve just seen this:
https://twitter.com/natfriedman/status/1057678371256119297?s=19
It would be great for the repo migration. Does anyone know if it is
available for pull requests? I don't see the link enabled...
On Tue, Nov 6, 2018, 11:25 Ignasi Barrera Ok, looks like there are no objections
HI Kazim,
The best way to move forward and get things done is... just go ahead and do
them :)
If you look at JCLOUDS-1387 and the pull request that fixes it, you'll see
that adding the missing instance types is quite easy. Would you want to add
them and send a pull request? (We'll be happy to
Just a friendly reminder :)
On Mon, 15 Oct 2018 at 09:59, Ignasi Barrera wrote:
> Nice! Look forward to discussing that proposal :)
> On Sun, 14 Oct 2018 at 18:36, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > just a quick update about that
For context, see this:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-1160
The linked issues must be fixed before upgrading Gson.
On Sun, Nov 11, 2018, 15:18 Andrea Turli Hi,
>
> there's no specific plans for that, afaik
>
> Would you mind open a PR against master for it?
>
> Best
>
> Il giorno
, 3 Nov 2018 at 18:46, Andrew Gaul wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 01:06:08PM +0100, Ignasi Barrera wrote:
> > Write access will not change. PMC members and committers will be the ones
> > to have write access to the repos.
> >
> > Regarding permissions to manage PR, etc
; Could we move incrementally, experimenting with the new workflow with
> > the most active committers and contributors, before cutting the cord on
> > the old workflow?
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 01:06:47PM +0100, Ignasi Barrera wrote:
> >> Hi!
> >>
>
1 - 100 of 898 matches
Mail list logo
