Re: Enhancement: Multi Delivery Services With Same Domain Name and Different Path Prefixes

2016-12-01 Thread Jifeng Yang (jifyang)
Hi JvD, The difference between the two is: the former doesn’t serve the content under the paths other than “/vod/” and “/live/”. For example, for the request “http://traffic-server.sports.ipcdn.com/path/file”, the former doesn’t serve it while the latter does serve it. Regarding the use case,

Re: Enhancement: Multi Delivery Services With Same Domain Name and Different Path Prefixes

2016-12-01 Thread Jan van Doorn
So for your example you would enter 2 delvieryservices with the same host_regex (which would be possible because you drop the unique requirement on it), different path prefixes and have different settings for each? I think I get that ? I _think_ this would work without changing Traffic Rou

Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC2

2016-12-01 Thread Leif Hedstrom
> On Nov 30, 2016, at 10:56 AM, Dan Kirkwood wrote: > > Hello All, > > I've prepared a release for v1.8.0 (RC2) > > Changes since 1.7.0: > https://github.com/apache/incubator-trafficcontrol/compare/RELEASE-1.7.0...RELEASE-1.8.0-RC2 > > This corresponds to git: > Hash: 8766dbcb38105fbc97b955b4

Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC2

2016-12-01 Thread Dan Kirkwood
ahh..thanks, Leif..I didn't realize it got the workspace in there..That's a relic of our Jenkins CI build -- it clones into a "workspace" dir. Looks like I'll need to modify the build script to be explicit when creating the tarball.. As for including the git hash in the file name,

Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC2

2016-12-01 Thread Phil Sorber
http://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html#basic-facts Missing checksums for the artifacts. And for the record, I am still not liking the RPM's as release artifacts, but I'll let the IPMC weigh in on that. On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 12:36 PM Leif Hedstrom wrote: > > > On Nov 30, 2016, at 10:56

Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC2

2016-12-01 Thread Leif Hedstrom
> On Dec 1, 2016, at 12:46 PM, Phil Sorber wrote: > > http://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html#basic-facts > > Missing checksums for the artifacts. > > And for the record, I am still not liking the RPM's as release artifacts, > but I'll let the IPMC weigh in on that. If I had a vote, n

Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC2

2016-12-01 Thread Dan Kirkwood
I'd also love to ditch the RPMs,but I'll abstain from voting since it directly impacts me immediately (less work for me!). Would anyone else like to weigh in on this? Dan On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 12:52 PM, Leif Hedstrom wrote: > >> On Dec 1, 2016, at 12:46 PM, Phil Sorber wrote: >> >> http:/

Re: [VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC2

2016-12-01 Thread David Neuman
If I remember correctly, the RPMs were included as a convenience. I am ok with not including them, if someone wants an RPM they are easy enough to build with the build script. On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 1:40 PM, Dan Kirkwood wrote: > I'd also love to ditch the RPMs,but I'll abstain from voting

[VOTE] Traffic Control RELEASE-1.8.0-RC3

2016-12-01 Thread Dan Kirkwood
Hello All, I've prepared another release for v1.8.0 (RC3) Changes since 1.7.0: https://github.com/apache/incubator-trafficcontrol/compare/RELEASE-1.7.0...RELEASE-1.8.0-RC3 This corresponds to git: Hash: daf585eacdcae4f57d60f14b4b6170b004058559 Tag: RELEASE-1.8.0-RC3 Which can be verified with t