You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cloudstack.apache.org by Raja Pullela <ra...@citrix.com> on 2015/09/24 10:35:31 UTC
VR refactoring, concerns and a way out ?
Hi,
I understand a concern on the VR changes was raised earlier. My apologies to restart this thread again.
However, my last conversation with Jayapal, who has fixed/have been fixing lot of VR issues, about the VR issues and he is pretty concerned about the refactoring that has happened. I have had the same concern for sometime now (VR issues have been on the list of issues to be looked into for at least 4+ weeks) and wanted to see a good solution for this- with VR being very fundamental to the system.
Couple of solutions/proposals –
1) Back out the VR changes – Pros: VR has been stable for some time and it is working well.
2) Continue to fix/stability VR changes - Concerns: is the unknowns, what we will find out and how long this will take to stabilize the VR functionality.
Please chime in if you have any thoughts or concerns around this,
best,
Raja
Re: VR refactoring, concerns and a way out ?
Posted by Sebastien Goasguen <ru...@gmail.com>.
@somesh you message is not helping at all.
The problems is being worked on by a lot of people. Folks know the current blockers and I am expecting to see PR come in to fix them in the coming days. We will then see what the results of BVT are.
Please read the full thread before replying.
> On Sep 30, 2015, at 5:37 PM, Somesh Naidu <So...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>> To sum it up: it’s easy to sit-down and wait for other people to work on features/test/fixes.
>
> Wilder - essentially are you saying these failures are due to a. Ramnath and folks didn't contribute at the time and b. you did but weren't able to completely nail it down?
>
> Raja/Ramnath - would it help and be better for the community as well as you if you'd just let ACS build be in the current state (as per you unstable router), create your own branch, implement your approach and fix the router (stable as per your opinion) for your users.
>
> This way everyone would be happy.
>
> Regards,
> Somesh
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wilder Rodrigues [mailto:WRodrigues@schubergphilis.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 8:48 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: VR refactoring, concerns and a way out ?
>
> Raja,
>
> A nice way out would be to have more people knowing about coding and git. I have no idea from where you got this non-sense approach, but I would say it can be compared with the previous git flow the community had: not tests; no PRs; no review.
>
> @Ramanath: you, and many others, should have pitched in when the code was merged, months ago, and when effort to help testing was requested.
>
> To sum it up: it’s easy to sit-down and wait for other people to work on features/test/fixes.
>
> Cheers,
> Wilder
>
>
>> On 24 Sep 2015, at 14:33, Sebastien Goasguen <ru...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Sep 24, 2015, at 2:00 PM, Ramanath Katru <ra...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> My vote is for the approach no.1 - to backout completely. Most of VR functionalities are broken and are in a mess to say the least. It definitely will take some time and effort from several folks to get it to a stable state.
>>>
>>
>> So which VR changes are we talking about. If it was merged it should mean that tests passed and it worked at least in a controlled environment.
>>
>>> Ram Katru
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Raja Pullela [mailto:raja.pullela@citrix.com]
>>> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 2:06 PM
>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>>> Subject: VR refactoring, concerns and a way out ?
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I understand a concern on the VR changes was raised earlier. My apologies to restart this thread again.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> However, my last conversation with Jayapal, who has fixed/have been fixing lot of VR issues, about the VR issues and he is pretty concerned about the refactoring that has happened. I have had the same concern for sometime now (VR issues have been on the list of issues to be looked into for at least 4+ weeks) and wanted to see a good solution for this- with VR being very fundamental to the system.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Couple of solutions/proposals –
>>>
>>> 1) Back out the VR changes – Pros: VR has been stable for some time and it is working well.
>>>
>>> 2) Continue to fix/stability VR changes - Concerns: is the unknowns, what we will find out and how long this will take to stabilize the VR functionality.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Please chime in if you have any thoughts or concerns around this,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> best,
>>>
>>> Raja
>>
>
RE: VR refactoring, concerns and a way out ?
Posted by Somesh Naidu <So...@citrix.com>.
> To sum it up: it’s easy to sit-down and wait for other people to work on features/test/fixes.
Wilder - essentially are you saying these failures are due to a. Ramnath and folks didn't contribute at the time and b. you did but weren't able to completely nail it down?
Raja/Ramnath - would it help and be better for the community as well as you if you'd just let ACS build be in the current state (as per you unstable router), create your own branch, implement your approach and fix the router (stable as per your opinion) for your users.
This way everyone would be happy.
Regards,
Somesh
-----Original Message-----
From: Wilder Rodrigues [mailto:WRodrigues@schubergphilis.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 8:48 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: VR refactoring, concerns and a way out ?
Raja,
A nice way out would be to have more people knowing about coding and git. I have no idea from where you got this non-sense approach, but I would say it can be compared with the previous git flow the community had: not tests; no PRs; no review.
@Ramanath: you, and many others, should have pitched in when the code was merged, months ago, and when effort to help testing was requested.
To sum it up: it’s easy to sit-down and wait for other people to work on features/test/fixes.
Cheers,
Wilder
> On 24 Sep 2015, at 14:33, Sebastien Goasguen <ru...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> On Sep 24, 2015, at 2:00 PM, Ramanath Katru <ra...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>
>> My vote is for the approach no.1 - to backout completely. Most of VR functionalities are broken and are in a mess to say the least. It definitely will take some time and effort from several folks to get it to a stable state.
>>
>
> So which VR changes are we talking about. If it was merged it should mean that tests passed and it worked at least in a controlled environment.
>
>> Ram Katru
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Raja Pullela [mailto:raja.pullela@citrix.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 2:06 PM
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Subject: VR refactoring, concerns and a way out ?
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>>
>> I understand a concern on the VR changes was raised earlier. My apologies to restart this thread again.
>>
>>
>>
>> However, my last conversation with Jayapal, who has fixed/have been fixing lot of VR issues, about the VR issues and he is pretty concerned about the refactoring that has happened. I have had the same concern for sometime now (VR issues have been on the list of issues to be looked into for at least 4+ weeks) and wanted to see a good solution for this- with VR being very fundamental to the system.
>>
>>
>>
>> Couple of solutions/proposals –
>>
>> 1) Back out the VR changes – Pros: VR has been stable for some time and it is working well.
>>
>> 2) Continue to fix/stability VR changes - Concerns: is the unknowns, what we will find out and how long this will take to stabilize the VR functionality.
>>
>>
>>
>> Please chime in if you have any thoughts or concerns around this,
>>
>>
>>
>> best,
>>
>> Raja
>
Re: VR refactoring, concerns and a way out ?
Posted by Wilder Rodrigues <WR...@schubergphilis.com>.
Raja,
A nice way out would be to have more people knowing about coding and git. I have no idea from where you got this non-sense approach, but I would say it can be compared with the previous git flow the community had: not tests; no PRs; no review.
@Ramanath: you, and many others, should have pitched in when the code was merged, months ago, and when effort to help testing was requested.
To sum it up: it’s easy to sit-down and wait for other people to work on features/test/fixes.
Cheers,
Wilder
> On 24 Sep 2015, at 14:33, Sebastien Goasguen <ru...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> On Sep 24, 2015, at 2:00 PM, Ramanath Katru <ra...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>
>> My vote is for the approach no.1 - to backout completely. Most of VR functionalities are broken and are in a mess to say the least. It definitely will take some time and effort from several folks to get it to a stable state.
>>
>
> So which VR changes are we talking about. If it was merged it should mean that tests passed and it worked at least in a controlled environment.
>
>> Ram Katru
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Raja Pullela [mailto:raja.pullela@citrix.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 2:06 PM
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Subject: VR refactoring, concerns and a way out ?
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>>
>> I understand a concern on the VR changes was raised earlier. My apologies to restart this thread again.
>>
>>
>>
>> However, my last conversation with Jayapal, who has fixed/have been fixing lot of VR issues, about the VR issues and he is pretty concerned about the refactoring that has happened. I have had the same concern for sometime now (VR issues have been on the list of issues to be looked into for at least 4+ weeks) and wanted to see a good solution for this- with VR being very fundamental to the system.
>>
>>
>>
>> Couple of solutions/proposals –
>>
>> 1) Back out the VR changes – Pros: VR has been stable for some time and it is working well.
>>
>> 2) Continue to fix/stability VR changes - Concerns: is the unknowns, what we will find out and how long this will take to stabilize the VR functionality.
>>
>>
>>
>> Please chime in if you have any thoughts or concerns around this,
>>
>>
>>
>> best,
>>
>> Raja
>
Re: VR refactoring, concerns and a way out ?
Posted by Sebastien Goasguen <ru...@gmail.com>.
> On Sep 24, 2015, at 2:00 PM, Ramanath Katru <ra...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
> My vote is for the approach no.1 - to backout completely. Most of VR functionalities are broken and are in a mess to say the least. It definitely will take some time and effort from several folks to get it to a stable state.
>
So which VR changes are we talking about. If it was merged it should mean that tests passed and it worked at least in a controlled environment.
> Ram Katru
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Raja Pullela [mailto:raja.pullela@citrix.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 2:06 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: VR refactoring, concerns and a way out ?
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I understand a concern on the VR changes was raised earlier. My apologies to restart this thread again.
>
>
>
> However, my last conversation with Jayapal, who has fixed/have been fixing lot of VR issues, about the VR issues and he is pretty concerned about the refactoring that has happened. I have had the same concern for sometime now (VR issues have been on the list of issues to be looked into for at least 4+ weeks) and wanted to see a good solution for this- with VR being very fundamental to the system.
>
>
>
> Couple of solutions/proposals –
>
> 1) Back out the VR changes – Pros: VR has been stable for some time and it is working well.
>
> 2) Continue to fix/stability VR changes - Concerns: is the unknowns, what we will find out and how long this will take to stabilize the VR functionality.
>
>
>
> Please chime in if you have any thoughts or concerns around this,
>
>
>
> best,
>
> Raja
RE: VR refactoring, concerns and a way out ?
Posted by Ramanath Katru <ra...@citrix.com>.
My vote is for the approach no.1 - to backout completely. Most of VR functionalities are broken and are in a mess to say the least. It definitely will take some time and effort from several folks to get it to a stable state.
Ram Katru
-----Original Message-----
From: Raja Pullela [mailto:raja.pullela@citrix.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 2:06 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: VR refactoring, concerns and a way out ?
Hi,
I understand a concern on the VR changes was raised earlier. My apologies to restart this thread again.
However, my last conversation with Jayapal, who has fixed/have been fixing lot of VR issues, about the VR issues and he is pretty concerned about the refactoring that has happened. I have had the same concern for sometime now (VR issues have been on the list of issues to be looked into for at least 4+ weeks) and wanted to see a good solution for this- with VR being very fundamental to the system.
Couple of solutions/proposals –
1) Back out the VR changes – Pros: VR has been stable for some time and it is working well.
2) Continue to fix/stability VR changes - Concerns: is the unknowns, what we will find out and how long this will take to stabilize the VR functionality.
Please chime in if you have any thoughts or concerns around this,
best,
Raja