You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@cloudstack.apache.org by Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com> on 2013/10/31 21:50:30 UTC

[Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master

Hi,

I would like to merge support for Palo Alto Network's firewall appliances
to the master branch.  Development for this has been done by Will Stevens
at CloudOps on branch [1].

There was an introduction [2], a proposal [3], and a discussion [4] on the
mailing list regarding this feature.

Checklist:
Jira ticket for the feature is here [5].
The FS can be found at [6].
Unit tests for the feature are available at [7] and [8].  I have developed
the unit tests with a flag to output additional detail in the console [9].
 Here is the result of the tests without detail [10] and here is the result
of the tests with detail [11].

This plugin communicates to the Palo Alto Networks firewall appliances
through an API documented at [12] with a training manual [13].
This plugin depends on a modification to core to remove a limitation which
was discussed here [14], with this jira issue [15] and has been approved
here [16].
This plugin is being reviewed at [17] according to this patch [18].

There are no 3rd party libraries needed for this plugin, however it does
depend on a 3rd party API [12][13] to orchestrate the configuration on the
appliance.  The plugin is currently being built via the 'nonoss' flag.  It
should be moved into either the 'noredist' or core because it appears that
'nonoss' will be going away [19] and 'noredist' has been merged [20].  I
would appreciate input on which build this should be put into given its
interaction with an 3rd party appliance.

Here are the slides for a presentation [21] given about this integration at
the CloudStack Collaboration Conference in Santa Clara, CA.

[1] https://github.com/cloudops/cs_palo_alto/tree/palo_alto
[2]
http://markmail.org/message/hukydzwkec3dwuxq?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Palo+Alto
[3]
http://markmail.org/message/odbg2icft7esj3ut?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Palo+Alto
[4]
http://markmail.org/message/n5276i4hfh7ek57o?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Palo+Alto
[5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-1275
[6]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Palo+Alto+Firewall+Integration
[7]
https://github.com/cloudops/cs_palo_alto/blob/palo_alto/plugins/network-elements/palo-alto/test/com/cloud/network/resource/PaloAltoResourceTest.java
[8]
https://github.com/cloudops/cs_palo_alto/blob/palo_alto/plugins/network-elements/palo-alto/test/com/cloud/network/resource/MockablePaloAltoResource.java
[9]
https://github.com/cloudops/cs_palo_alto/blob/palo_alto/plugins/network-elements/palo-alto/test/com/cloud/network/resource/PaloAltoResourceTest.java#L156
[10]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/palo_alto_tests_without_logging.txt?version=1&modificationDate=1383248404474
[11]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/palo_alto_tests_with_logging.txt?version=1&modificationDate=1383248432061
[12]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/XML-API-5-1.0-RevA.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1366305634000
[13]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/XML_API_Training.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1366305635000
[14]
http://markmail.org/message/374hyn7ko6zrb2cf?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+supported+source+nat+types
[15] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-4991
[16] https://reviews.apache.org/r/15047/
[17] https://reviews.apache.org/r/15050/
[18] https://reviews.apache.org/r/15050/diff/
[19]
http://markmail.org/message/37qcg4lgudmf57ws?q=DISCUSS%5D+rename+nonoss+to+noredist
[20]
http://markmail.org/message/zqkiuod5qabcyra6?q=%5BMERGE%5D+changing+nonoss+to+noredist
[21]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/CS_PA_Integration.pptx?version=1&modificationDate=1383250830719

Cheers,

Will

Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master

Posted by Chip Childers <ch...@apache.org>.

On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 06:59:25PM +0000, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
> mvn --projects='org.apache.cloudstack:cloudstack' org.apache.rat:apache-rat-plugin:0.8:check

s/0.8/0.10 if you want the latest

Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master

Posted by Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>.

Perfect.  Thank you for the details.


On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Sheng Yang <sh...@yasker.org> wrote:

> Oh, that means something wrong with the license header of the file(header
> missing in this case).
>
> http://creadur.apache.org/rat/
>
> --Sheng
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Just so I know, can you explain what it means to 'Fail RAT'?  Thx...
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Sheng Yang <sh...@yasker.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Fixed.
> > >
> > > --Sheng
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Animesh Chaturvedi <
> > > animesh.chaturvedi@citrix.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Fails RAT on
> > > >
> > >
> >
> plugins/network-elements/palo-alto/src/com/cloud/network/utils/HttpClientWrapper.java
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: williamstevens@gmail.com [mailto:williamstevens@gmail.com]
> On
> > > > > Behalf Of Will Stevens
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 10:15 AM
> > > > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > > > > Subject: Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to
> > master
> > > > >
> > > > > Great!  Thank you Sheng...
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Sheng Yang <sh...@yasker.org>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Looks good to me.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Applied to MASTER branch. Thanks!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --Sheng
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Will Stevens <
> > wstevens@cloudops.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > @Sheng:  This should be ready to go now.  I built the patch
> from
> > > > > > tonight's
> > > > > > > master and I included a more detailed commit message as you
> > > > > requested.
> > > > > >  Let
> > > > > > > me know if you have any questions/problems...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > @David:  As per this discussion (and a previous one [1]), I
> have
> > > > > > > moved
> > > > > > this
> > > > > > > code from being built with the depreciated 'nonoss' flag to
> core
> > > > > > > since it does not depend on any 3rd party libraries at build or
> > > > > runtime.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Will
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [1]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > http://markmail.org/message/fxphjkba7bonlesd?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Einc
> > > > > > ubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Palo+Alto
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Will Stevens
> > > > > > > <ws...@cloudops.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks for that David.  You are absolutely correct, this
> plugin
> > > > > > > > has no dependencies on any 3rd party code at build or
> runtime.
> > > > > > > > Everything the plugin requires is built into the plugin.  I
> was
> > > > > > > > unclear if its
> > > > > > > dependance
> > > > > > > > on a 3rd party API and appliance to be functional was
> relevant.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I think you are right.  I think it should probably be in the
> > core
> > > > > > build.
> > > > > > > >  I will make that change when I merge in the latest master
> for
> > > > > > > > Sheng
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > rebuild the patch.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Will
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 10:19 AM, David Nalley <david@gnsa.us
> >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> So perhaps a bit of history.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> nonoss/noredist is for targets that aren't built 'by
> default'
> > > > > (e.g.
> > > > > > > >> you must explicitly turn them on). We do this because the
> ASF
> > > > > > > >> wants the default build to be truly unencumbered and where
> > there
> > > > > > > >> are dependencies on non-open source, or non-Apache
> compatible
> > > > > > > >> code, we typically turn them off. In example: historically,
> > > > > > > >> Netscaler libraries were not open source, and we had a
> > > dependency
> > > > > > > >> on those libraries, so we placed the netscaler plugin into
> the
> > > > > > > >> nonoss. Since then the netscaler libraries have been open
> > > > > > > >> sourced, and we could move those out of noredist.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> So - is there third party code that you have as a build or
> > > > > > > >> runtime dependency? If so what is the license for that third
> > > > > > > >> party code? (My really fast perusal didn't catch anything
> that
> > > > > > > >> was immediately
> > > > > > > >> troubling)
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> --David
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Will Stevens
> > > > > > > >> <ws...@cloudops.com>
> > > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > Its dependence on a third party API and appliance, similar
> > to
> > > > > > > >> > the
> > > > > > srx
> > > > > > > >> and
> > > > > > > >> > netscaler. I am not convinced it should be in noredist,
> but
> > I
> > > > > > > >> > was
> > > > > > > >> following
> > > > > > > >> > the same model as other similar plugins.  Feedback on this
> > > > > > > >> > would be helpful.
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > Ws
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > On Tuesday, November 5, 2013, David Nalley wrote:
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> >> On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Will Stevens <
> > > > > > wstevens@cloudops.com
> > > > > > > >> <javascript:;>>
> > > > > > > >> >> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> >> > Sheng, I will rebuild the patch for the latest master.
> >  The
> > > > > > latest
> > > > > > > >> master
> > > > > > > >> >> > has depreciated the 'nonoss' flag in favour of
> > 'noredist'.
> > > I
> > > > > > > >> >> > was
> > > > > > > >> building
> > > > > > > >> >> > in nonoss previously. I am guessing I should use the
> > > > > > > >> >> > noredist
> > > > > > flag
> > > > > > > >> now?
> > > > > > > >> >> >
> > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > >> >> Will - what is causing this to be noredist/nonoss? My
> quick
> > > > > > > >> >> perusal
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > >> >> your patch didn't surface anything that would push it
> into
> > > > > > > >> >> that category.
> > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > >> >> --David
> > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master

Posted by Sheng Yang <sh...@yasker.org>.

Oh, that means something wrong with the license header of the file(header
missing in this case).

http://creadur.apache.org/rat/

--Sheng


On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com> wrote:

> Just so I know, can you explain what it means to 'Fail RAT'?  Thx...
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Sheng Yang <sh...@yasker.org> wrote:
>
> > Fixed.
> >
> > --Sheng
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Animesh Chaturvedi <
> > animesh.chaturvedi@citrix.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Fails RAT on
> > >
> >
> plugins/network-elements/palo-alto/src/com/cloud/network/utils/HttpClientWrapper.java
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: williamstevens@gmail.com [mailto:williamstevens@gmail.com] On
> > > > Behalf Of Will Stevens
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 10:15 AM
> > > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > > > Subject: Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to
> master
> > > >
> > > > Great!  Thank you Sheng...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Sheng Yang <sh...@yasker.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Looks good to me.
> > > > >
> > > > > Applied to MASTER branch. Thanks!
> > > > >
> > > > > --Sheng
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Will Stevens <
> wstevens@cloudops.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > @Sheng:  This should be ready to go now.  I built the patch from
> > > > > tonight's
> > > > > > master and I included a more detailed commit message as you
> > > > requested.
> > > > >  Let
> > > > > > me know if you have any questions/problems...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > @David:  As per this discussion (and a previous one [1]), I have
> > > > > > moved
> > > > > this
> > > > > > code from being built with the depreciated 'nonoss' flag to core
> > > > > > since it does not depend on any 3rd party libraries at build or
> > > > runtime.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Will
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1]
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > http://markmail.org/message/fxphjkba7bonlesd?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Einc
> > > > > ubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Palo+Alto
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Will Stevens
> > > > > > <ws...@cloudops.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks for that David.  You are absolutely correct, this plugin
> > > > > > > has no dependencies on any 3rd party code at build or runtime.
> > > > > > > Everything the plugin requires is built into the plugin.  I was
> > > > > > > unclear if its
> > > > > > dependance
> > > > > > > on a 3rd party API and appliance to be functional was relevant.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think you are right.  I think it should probably be in the
> core
> > > > > build.
> > > > > > >  I will make that change when I merge in the latest master for
> > > > > > > Sheng
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > rebuild the patch.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Will
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 10:19 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> So perhaps a bit of history.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> nonoss/noredist is for targets that aren't built 'by default'
> > > > (e.g.
> > > > > > >> you must explicitly turn them on). We do this because the ASF
> > > > > > >> wants the default build to be truly unencumbered and where
> there
> > > > > > >> are dependencies on non-open source, or non-Apache compatible
> > > > > > >> code, we typically turn them off. In example: historically,
> > > > > > >> Netscaler libraries were not open source, and we had a
> > dependency
> > > > > > >> on those libraries, so we placed the netscaler plugin into the
> > > > > > >> nonoss. Since then the netscaler libraries have been open
> > > > > > >> sourced, and we could move those out of noredist.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> So - is there third party code that you have as a build or
> > > > > > >> runtime dependency? If so what is the license for that third
> > > > > > >> party code? (My really fast perusal didn't catch anything that
> > > > > > >> was immediately
> > > > > > >> troubling)
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> --David
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Will Stevens
> > > > > > >> <ws...@cloudops.com>
> > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > Its dependence on a third party API and appliance, similar
> to
> > > > > > >> > the
> > > > > srx
> > > > > > >> and
> > > > > > >> > netscaler. I am not convinced it should be in noredist, but
> I
> > > > > > >> > was
> > > > > > >> following
> > > > > > >> > the same model as other similar plugins.  Feedback on this
> > > > > > >> > would be helpful.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > Ws
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > On Tuesday, November 5, 2013, David Nalley wrote:
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> >> On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Will Stevens <
> > > > > wstevens@cloudops.com
> > > > > > >> <javascript:;>>
> > > > > > >> >> wrote:
> > > > > > >> >> > Sheng, I will rebuild the patch for the latest master.
>  The
> > > > > latest
> > > > > > >> master
> > > > > > >> >> > has depreciated the 'nonoss' flag in favour of
> 'noredist'.
> > I
> > > > > > >> >> > was
> > > > > > >> building
> > > > > > >> >> > in nonoss previously. I am guessing I should use the
> > > > > > >> >> > noredist
> > > > > flag
> > > > > > >> now?
> > > > > > >> >> >
> > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> >> Will - what is causing this to be noredist/nonoss? My quick
> > > > > > >> >> perusal
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > >> >> your patch didn't surface anything that would push it into
> > > > > > >> >> that category.
> > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> >> --David
> > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> >
>

RE: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master

Posted by Animesh Chaturvedi <an...@citrix.com>.

RAT is release audit tool and checks for missing license headers. You can run it as below


mvn --projects='org.apache.cloudstack:cloudstack' org.apache.rat:apache-rat-plugin:0.8:check


The build should FAIL if there are any non-compliant files that are not specifically excluded from the ASF license header requirement. You can optionally review the target/rat.txt file after the run completes. 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: williamstevens@gmail.com [mailto:williamstevens@gmail.com] On
> Behalf Of Will Stevens
> Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 10:51 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master
> 
> Just so I know, can you explain what it means to 'Fail RAT'?  Thx...
> 
> 
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Sheng Yang <sh...@yasker.org> wrote:
> 
> > Fixed.
> >
> > --Sheng
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Animesh Chaturvedi <
> > animesh.chaturvedi@citrix.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Fails RAT on
> > >
> > plugins/network-elements/palo-alto/src/com/cloud/network/utils/HttpCli
> > entWrapper.java
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: williamstevens@gmail.com [mailto:williamstevens@gmail.com]
> > > > On Behalf Of Will Stevens
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 10:15 AM
> > > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > > > Subject: Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to
> > > > master
> > > >
> > > > Great!  Thank you Sheng...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Sheng Yang <sh...@yasker.org>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Looks good to me.
> > > > >
> > > > > Applied to MASTER branch. Thanks!
> > > > >
> > > > > --Sheng
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Will Stevens
> > > > > <ws...@cloudops.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > @Sheng:  This should be ready to go now.  I built the patch
> > > > > > from
> > > > > tonight's
> > > > > > master and I included a more detailed commit message as you
> > > > requested.
> > > > >  Let
> > > > > > me know if you have any questions/problems...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > @David:  As per this discussion (and a previous one [1]), I
> > > > > > have moved
> > > > > this
> > > > > > code from being built with the depreciated 'nonoss' flag to
> > > > > > core since it does not depend on any 3rd party libraries at
> > > > > > build or
> > > > runtime.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Will
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1]
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > http://markmail.org/message/fxphjkba7bonlesd?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Einc
> > > > > ubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Palo+Alto
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Will Stevens
> > > > > > <ws...@cloudops.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks for that David.  You are absolutely correct, this
> > > > > > > plugin has no dependencies on any 3rd party code at build or
> runtime.
> > > > > > > Everything the plugin requires is built into the plugin.  I
> > > > > > > was unclear if its
> > > > > > dependance
> > > > > > > on a 3rd party API and appliance to be functional was
> relevant.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think you are right.  I think it should probably be in the
> > > > > > > core
> > > > > build.
> > > > > > >  I will make that change when I merge in the latest master
> > > > > > > for Sheng
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > rebuild the patch.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Will
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 10:19 AM, David Nalley
> > > > > > > <da...@gnsa.us>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> So perhaps a bit of history.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> nonoss/noredist is for targets that aren't built 'by
> default'
> > > > (e.g.
> > > > > > >> you must explicitly turn them on). We do this because the
> > > > > > >> ASF wants the default build to be truly unencumbered and
> > > > > > >> where there are dependencies on non-open source, or
> > > > > > >> non-Apache compatible code, we typically turn them off. In
> > > > > > >> example: historically, Netscaler libraries were not open
> > > > > > >> source, and we had a
> > dependency
> > > > > > >> on those libraries, so we placed the netscaler plugin into
> > > > > > >> the nonoss. Since then the netscaler libraries have been
> > > > > > >> open sourced, and we could move those out of noredist.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> So - is there third party code that you have as a build or
> > > > > > >> runtime dependency? If so what is the license for that
> > > > > > >> third party code? (My really fast perusal didn't catch
> > > > > > >> anything that was immediately
> > > > > > >> troubling)
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> --David
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Will Stevens
> > > > > > >> <ws...@cloudops.com>
> > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > Its dependence on a third party API and appliance,
> > > > > > >> > similar to the
> > > > > srx
> > > > > > >> and
> > > > > > >> > netscaler. I am not convinced it should be in noredist,
> > > > > > >> > but I was
> > > > > > >> following
> > > > > > >> > the same model as other similar plugins.  Feedback on
> > > > > > >> > this would be helpful.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > Ws
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > On Tuesday, November 5, 2013, David Nalley wrote:
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> >> On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Will Stevens <
> > > > > wstevens@cloudops.com
> > > > > > >> <javascript:;>>
> > > > > > >> >> wrote:
> > > > > > >> >> > Sheng, I will rebuild the patch for the latest master.
> > > > > > >> >> > The
> > > > > latest
> > > > > > >> master
> > > > > > >> >> > has depreciated the 'nonoss' flag in favour of
> 'noredist'.
> > I
> > > > > > >> >> > was
> > > > > > >> building
> > > > > > >> >> > in nonoss previously. I am guessing I should use the
> > > > > > >> >> > noredist
> > > > > flag
> > > > > > >> now?
> > > > > > >> >> >
> > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> >> Will - what is causing this to be noredist/nonoss? My
> > > > > > >> >> quick perusal
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > >> >> your patch didn't surface anything that would push it
> > > > > > >> >> into that category.
> > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> >> --David
> > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> >

Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master

Posted by Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>.

Just so I know, can you explain what it means to 'Fail RAT'?  Thx...


On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Sheng Yang <sh...@yasker.org> wrote:

> Fixed.
>
> --Sheng
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Animesh Chaturvedi <
> animesh.chaturvedi@citrix.com> wrote:
>
> > Fails RAT on
> >
> plugins/network-elements/palo-alto/src/com/cloud/network/utils/HttpClientWrapper.java
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: williamstevens@gmail.com [mailto:williamstevens@gmail.com] On
> > > Behalf Of Will Stevens
> > > Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 10:15 AM
> > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master
> > >
> > > Great!  Thank you Sheng...
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Sheng Yang <sh...@yasker.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Looks good to me.
> > > >
> > > > Applied to MASTER branch. Thanks!
> > > >
> > > > --Sheng
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > @Sheng:  This should be ready to go now.  I built the patch from
> > > > tonight's
> > > > > master and I included a more detailed commit message as you
> > > requested.
> > > >  Let
> > > > > me know if you have any questions/problems...
> > > > >
> > > > > @David:  As per this discussion (and a previous one [1]), I have
> > > > > moved
> > > > this
> > > > > code from being built with the depreciated 'nonoss' flag to core
> > > > > since it does not depend on any 3rd party libraries at build or
> > > runtime.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > >
> > > > > Will
> > > > >
> > > > > [1]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> http://markmail.org/message/fxphjkba7bonlesd?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Einc
> > > > ubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Palo+Alto
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Will Stevens
> > > > > <ws...@cloudops.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for that David.  You are absolutely correct, this plugin
> > > > > > has no dependencies on any 3rd party code at build or runtime.
> > > > > > Everything the plugin requires is built into the plugin.  I was
> > > > > > unclear if its
> > > > > dependance
> > > > > > on a 3rd party API and appliance to be functional was relevant.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think you are right.  I think it should probably be in the core
> > > > build.
> > > > > >  I will make that change when I merge in the latest master for
> > > > > > Sheng
> > > > and
> > > > > > rebuild the patch.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Will
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 10:19 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> So perhaps a bit of history.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> nonoss/noredist is for targets that aren't built 'by default'
> > > (e.g.
> > > > > >> you must explicitly turn them on). We do this because the ASF
> > > > > >> wants the default build to be truly unencumbered and where there
> > > > > >> are dependencies on non-open source, or non-Apache compatible
> > > > > >> code, we typically turn them off. In example: historically,
> > > > > >> Netscaler libraries were not open source, and we had a
> dependency
> > > > > >> on those libraries, so we placed the netscaler plugin into the
> > > > > >> nonoss. Since then the netscaler libraries have been open
> > > > > >> sourced, and we could move those out of noredist.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> So - is there third party code that you have as a build or
> > > > > >> runtime dependency? If so what is the license for that third
> > > > > >> party code? (My really fast perusal didn't catch anything that
> > > > > >> was immediately
> > > > > >> troubling)
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> --David
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Will Stevens
> > > > > >> <ws...@cloudops.com>
> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > >> > Its dependence on a third party API and appliance, similar to
> > > > > >> > the
> > > > srx
> > > > > >> and
> > > > > >> > netscaler. I am not convinced it should be in noredist, but I
> > > > > >> > was
> > > > > >> following
> > > > > >> > the same model as other similar plugins.  Feedback on this
> > > > > >> > would be helpful.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > Ws
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > On Tuesday, November 5, 2013, David Nalley wrote:
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >> On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Will Stevens <
> > > > wstevens@cloudops.com
> > > > > >> <javascript:;>>
> > > > > >> >> wrote:
> > > > > >> >> > Sheng, I will rebuild the patch for the latest master.  The
> > > > latest
> > > > > >> master
> > > > > >> >> > has depreciated the 'nonoss' flag in favour of 'noredist'.
> I
> > > > > >> >> > was
> > > > > >> building
> > > > > >> >> > in nonoss previously. I am guessing I should use the
> > > > > >> >> > noredist
> > > > flag
> > > > > >> now?
> > > > > >> >> >
> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> >> Will - what is causing this to be noredist/nonoss? My quick
> > > > > >> >> perusal
> > > > > of
> > > > > >> >> your patch didn't surface anything that would push it into
> > > > > >> >> that category.
> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> >> --David
> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> >
>

Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master

Posted by Sheng Yang <sh...@yasker.org>.

Fixed.

--Sheng


On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Animesh Chaturvedi <
animesh.chaturvedi@citrix.com> wrote:

> Fails RAT on
> plugins/network-elements/palo-alto/src/com/cloud/network/utils/HttpClientWrapper.java
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: williamstevens@gmail.com [mailto:williamstevens@gmail.com] On
> > Behalf Of Will Stevens
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 10:15 AM
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master
> >
> > Great!  Thank you Sheng...
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Sheng Yang <sh...@yasker.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Looks good to me.
> > >
> > > Applied to MASTER branch. Thanks!
> > >
> > > --Sheng
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > @Sheng:  This should be ready to go now.  I built the patch from
> > > tonight's
> > > > master and I included a more detailed commit message as you
> > requested.
> > >  Let
> > > > me know if you have any questions/problems...
> > > >
> > > > @David:  As per this discussion (and a previous one [1]), I have
> > > > moved
> > > this
> > > > code from being built with the depreciated 'nonoss' flag to core
> > > > since it does not depend on any 3rd party libraries at build or
> > runtime.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > >
> > > > Will
> > > >
> > > > [1]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > http://markmail.org/message/fxphjkba7bonlesd?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Einc
> > > ubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Palo+Alto
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Will Stevens
> > > > <ws...@cloudops.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Thanks for that David.  You are absolutely correct, this plugin
> > > > > has no dependencies on any 3rd party code at build or runtime.
> > > > > Everything the plugin requires is built into the plugin.  I was
> > > > > unclear if its
> > > > dependance
> > > > > on a 3rd party API and appliance to be functional was relevant.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think you are right.  I think it should probably be in the core
> > > build.
> > > > >  I will make that change when I merge in the latest master for
> > > > > Sheng
> > > and
> > > > > rebuild the patch.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > >
> > > > > Will
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 10:19 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> So perhaps a bit of history.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> nonoss/noredist is for targets that aren't built 'by default'
> > (e.g.
> > > > >> you must explicitly turn them on). We do this because the ASF
> > > > >> wants the default build to be truly unencumbered and where there
> > > > >> are dependencies on non-open source, or non-Apache compatible
> > > > >> code, we typically turn them off. In example: historically,
> > > > >> Netscaler libraries were not open source, and we had a dependency
> > > > >> on those libraries, so we placed the netscaler plugin into the
> > > > >> nonoss. Since then the netscaler libraries have been open
> > > > >> sourced, and we could move those out of noredist.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> So - is there third party code that you have as a build or
> > > > >> runtime dependency? If so what is the license for that third
> > > > >> party code? (My really fast perusal didn't catch anything that
> > > > >> was immediately
> > > > >> troubling)
> > > > >>
> > > > >> --David
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Will Stevens
> > > > >> <ws...@cloudops.com>
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >> > Its dependence on a third party API and appliance, similar to
> > > > >> > the
> > > srx
> > > > >> and
> > > > >> > netscaler. I am not convinced it should be in noredist, but I
> > > > >> > was
> > > > >> following
> > > > >> > the same model as other similar plugins.  Feedback on this
> > > > >> > would be helpful.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Ws
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > On Tuesday, November 5, 2013, David Nalley wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >> On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Will Stevens <
> > > wstevens@cloudops.com
> > > > >> <javascript:;>>
> > > > >> >> wrote:
> > > > >> >> > Sheng, I will rebuild the patch for the latest master.  The
> > > latest
> > > > >> master
> > > > >> >> > has depreciated the 'nonoss' flag in favour of 'noredist'. I
> > > > >> >> > was
> > > > >> building
> > > > >> >> > in nonoss previously. I am guessing I should use the
> > > > >> >> > noredist
> > > flag
> > > > >> now?
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> Will - what is causing this to be noredist/nonoss? My quick
> > > > >> >> perusal
> > > > of
> > > > >> >> your patch didn't surface anything that would push it into
> > > > >> >> that category.
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> --David
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
>

RE: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master

Posted by Animesh Chaturvedi <an...@citrix.com>.

Fails RAT on plugins/network-elements/palo-alto/src/com/cloud/network/utils/HttpClientWrapper.java


> -----Original Message-----
> From: williamstevens@gmail.com [mailto:williamstevens@gmail.com] On
> Behalf Of Will Stevens
> Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 10:15 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master
> 
> Great!  Thank you Sheng...
> 
> 
> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Sheng Yang <sh...@yasker.org> wrote:
> 
> > Looks good to me.
> >
> > Applied to MASTER branch. Thanks!
> >
> > --Sheng
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > @Sheng:  This should be ready to go now.  I built the patch from
> > tonight's
> > > master and I included a more detailed commit message as you
> requested.
> >  Let
> > > me know if you have any questions/problems...
> > >
> > > @David:  As per this discussion (and a previous one [1]), I have
> > > moved
> > this
> > > code from being built with the depreciated 'nonoss' flag to core
> > > since it does not depend on any 3rd party libraries at build or
> runtime.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Will
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> > >
> > http://markmail.org/message/fxphjkba7bonlesd?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Einc
> > ubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Palo+Alto
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Will Stevens
> > > <ws...@cloudops.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks for that David.  You are absolutely correct, this plugin
> > > > has no dependencies on any 3rd party code at build or runtime.
> > > > Everything the plugin requires is built into the plugin.  I was
> > > > unclear if its
> > > dependance
> > > > on a 3rd party API and appliance to be functional was relevant.
> > > >
> > > > I think you are right.  I think it should probably be in the core
> > build.
> > > >  I will make that change when I merge in the latest master for
> > > > Sheng
> > and
> > > > rebuild the patch.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Will
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 10:19 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> So perhaps a bit of history.
> > > >>
> > > >> nonoss/noredist is for targets that aren't built 'by default'
> (e.g.
> > > >> you must explicitly turn them on). We do this because the ASF
> > > >> wants the default build to be truly unencumbered and where there
> > > >> are dependencies on non-open source, or non-Apache compatible
> > > >> code, we typically turn them off. In example: historically,
> > > >> Netscaler libraries were not open source, and we had a dependency
> > > >> on those libraries, so we placed the netscaler plugin into the
> > > >> nonoss. Since then the netscaler libraries have been open
> > > >> sourced, and we could move those out of noredist.
> > > >>
> > > >> So - is there third party code that you have as a build or
> > > >> runtime dependency? If so what is the license for that third
> > > >> party code? (My really fast perusal didn't catch anything that
> > > >> was immediately
> > > >> troubling)
> > > >>
> > > >> --David
> > > >>
> > > >> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Will Stevens
> > > >> <ws...@cloudops.com>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >> > Its dependence on a third party API and appliance, similar to
> > > >> > the
> > srx
> > > >> and
> > > >> > netscaler. I am not convinced it should be in noredist, but I
> > > >> > was
> > > >> following
> > > >> > the same model as other similar plugins.  Feedback on this
> > > >> > would be helpful.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Ws
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Tuesday, November 5, 2013, David Nalley wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> >> On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Will Stevens <
> > wstevens@cloudops.com
> > > >> <javascript:;>>
> > > >> >> wrote:
> > > >> >> > Sheng, I will rebuild the patch for the latest master.  The
> > latest
> > > >> master
> > > >> >> > has depreciated the 'nonoss' flag in favour of 'noredist'. I
> > > >> >> > was
> > > >> building
> > > >> >> > in nonoss previously. I am guessing I should use the
> > > >> >> > noredist
> > flag
> > > >> now?
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Will - what is causing this to be noredist/nonoss? My quick
> > > >> >> perusal
> > > of
> > > >> >> your patch didn't surface anything that would push it into
> > > >> >> that category.
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> --David
> > > >> >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >

Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master

Posted by Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>.

Great!  Thank you Sheng...


On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Sheng Yang <sh...@yasker.org> wrote:

> Looks good to me.
>
> Applied to MASTER branch. Thanks!
>
> --Sheng
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>
> wrote:
>
> > @Sheng:  This should be ready to go now.  I built the patch from
> tonight's
> > master and I included a more detailed commit message as you requested.
>  Let
> > me know if you have any questions/problems...
> >
> > @David:  As per this discussion (and a previous one [1]), I have moved
> this
> > code from being built with the depreciated 'nonoss' flag to core since it
> > does not depend on any 3rd party libraries at build or runtime.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Will
> >
> > [1]
> >
> >
> http://markmail.org/message/fxphjkba7bonlesd?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Palo+Alto
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks for that David.  You are absolutely correct, this plugin has no
> > > dependencies on any 3rd party code at build or runtime.  Everything the
> > > plugin requires is built into the plugin.  I was unclear if its
> > dependance
> > > on a 3rd party API and appliance to be functional was relevant.
> > >
> > > I think you are right.  I think it should probably be in the core
> build.
> > >  I will make that change when I merge in the latest master for Sheng
> and
> > > rebuild the patch.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Will
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 10:19 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> > >
> > >> So perhaps a bit of history.
> > >>
> > >> nonoss/noredist is for targets that aren't built 'by default' (e.g.
> > >> you must explicitly turn them on). We do this because the ASF wants
> > >> the default build to be truly unencumbered and where there are
> > >> dependencies on non-open source, or non-Apache compatible code, we
> > >> typically turn them off. In example: historically, Netscaler libraries
> > >> were not open source, and we had a dependency on those libraries, so
> > >> we placed the netscaler plugin into the nonoss. Since then the
> > >> netscaler libraries have been open sourced, and we could move those
> > >> out of noredist.
> > >>
> > >> So - is there third party code that you have as a build or runtime
> > >> dependency? If so what is the license for that third party code? (My
> > >> really fast perusal didn't catch anything that was immediately
> > >> troubling)
> > >>
> > >> --David
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> > Its dependence on a third party API and appliance, similar to the
> srx
> > >> and
> > >> > netscaler. I am not convinced it should be in noredist, but I was
> > >> following
> > >> > the same model as other similar plugins.  Feedback on this would be
> > >> > helpful.
> > >> >
> > >> > Ws
> > >> >
> > >> > On Tuesday, November 5, 2013, David Nalley wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Will Stevens <
> wstevens@cloudops.com
> > >> <javascript:;>>
> > >> >> wrote:
> > >> >> > Sheng, I will rebuild the patch for the latest master.  The
> latest
> > >> master
> > >> >> > has depreciated the 'nonoss' flag in favour of 'noredist'. I was
> > >> building
> > >> >> > in nonoss previously. I am guessing I should use the noredist
> flag
> > >> now?
> > >> >> >
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Will - what is causing this to be noredist/nonoss? My quick perusal
> > of
> > >> >> your patch didn't surface anything that would push it into that
> > >> >> category.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> --David
> > >> >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master

Posted by Sheng Yang <sh...@yasker.org>.

Looks good to me.

Applied to MASTER branch. Thanks!

--Sheng


On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com> wrote:

> @Sheng:  This should be ready to go now.  I built the patch from tonight's
> master and I included a more detailed commit message as you requested.  Let
> me know if you have any questions/problems...
>
> @David:  As per this discussion (and a previous one [1]), I have moved this
> code from being built with the depreciated 'nonoss' flag to core since it
> does not depend on any 3rd party libraries at build or runtime.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Will
>
> [1]
>
> http://markmail.org/message/fxphjkba7bonlesd?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Palo+Alto
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for that David.  You are absolutely correct, this plugin has no
> > dependencies on any 3rd party code at build or runtime.  Everything the
> > plugin requires is built into the plugin.  I was unclear if its
> dependance
> > on a 3rd party API and appliance to be functional was relevant.
> >
> > I think you are right.  I think it should probably be in the core build.
> >  I will make that change when I merge in the latest master for Sheng and
> > rebuild the patch.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Will
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 10:19 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> >
> >> So perhaps a bit of history.
> >>
> >> nonoss/noredist is for targets that aren't built 'by default' (e.g.
> >> you must explicitly turn them on). We do this because the ASF wants
> >> the default build to be truly unencumbered and where there are
> >> dependencies on non-open source, or non-Apache compatible code, we
> >> typically turn them off. In example: historically, Netscaler libraries
> >> were not open source, and we had a dependency on those libraries, so
> >> we placed the netscaler plugin into the nonoss. Since then the
> >> netscaler libraries have been open sourced, and we could move those
> >> out of noredist.
> >>
> >> So - is there third party code that you have as a build or runtime
> >> dependency? If so what is the license for that third party code? (My
> >> really fast perusal didn't catch anything that was immediately
> >> troubling)
> >>
> >> --David
> >>
> >> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Its dependence on a third party API and appliance, similar to the srx
> >> and
> >> > netscaler. I am not convinced it should be in noredist, but I was
> >> following
> >> > the same model as other similar plugins.  Feedback on this would be
> >> > helpful.
> >> >
> >> > Ws
> >> >
> >> > On Tuesday, November 5, 2013, David Nalley wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Will Stevens <wstevens@cloudops.com
> >> <javascript:;>>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> > Sheng, I will rebuild the patch for the latest master.  The latest
> >> master
> >> >> > has depreciated the 'nonoss' flag in favour of 'noredist'. I was
> >> building
> >> >> > in nonoss previously. I am guessing I should use the noredist flag
> >> now?
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Will - what is causing this to be noredist/nonoss? My quick perusal
> of
> >> >> your patch didn't surface anything that would push it into that
> >> >> category.
> >> >>
> >> >> --David
> >> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>

Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master

Posted by Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>.

@Sheng:  This should be ready to go now.  I built the patch from tonight's
master and I included a more detailed commit message as you requested.  Let
me know if you have any questions/problems...

@David:  As per this discussion (and a previous one [1]), I have moved this
code from being built with the depreciated 'nonoss' flag to core since it
does not depend on any 3rd party libraries at build or runtime.

Cheers,

Will

[1]
http://markmail.org/message/fxphjkba7bonlesd?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Palo+Alto


On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com> wrote:

> Thanks for that David.  You are absolutely correct, this plugin has no
> dependencies on any 3rd party code at build or runtime.  Everything the
> plugin requires is built into the plugin.  I was unclear if its dependance
> on a 3rd party API and appliance to be functional was relevant.
>
> I think you are right.  I think it should probably be in the core build.
>  I will make that change when I merge in the latest master for Sheng and
> rebuild the patch.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Will
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 10:19 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>
>> So perhaps a bit of history.
>>
>> nonoss/noredist is for targets that aren't built 'by default' (e.g.
>> you must explicitly turn them on). We do this because the ASF wants
>> the default build to be truly unencumbered and where there are
>> dependencies on non-open source, or non-Apache compatible code, we
>> typically turn them off. In example: historically, Netscaler libraries
>> were not open source, and we had a dependency on those libraries, so
>> we placed the netscaler plugin into the nonoss. Since then the
>> netscaler libraries have been open sourced, and we could move those
>> out of noredist.
>>
>> So - is there third party code that you have as a build or runtime
>> dependency? If so what is the license for that third party code? (My
>> really fast perusal didn't catch anything that was immediately
>> troubling)
>>
>> --David
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Its dependence on a third party API and appliance, similar to the srx
>> and
>> > netscaler. I am not convinced it should be in noredist, but I was
>> following
>> > the same model as other similar plugins.  Feedback on this would be
>> > helpful.
>> >
>> > Ws
>> >
>> > On Tuesday, November 5, 2013, David Nalley wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Will Stevens <wstevens@cloudops.com
>> <javascript:;>>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > Sheng, I will rebuild the patch for the latest master.  The latest
>> master
>> >> > has depreciated the 'nonoss' flag in favour of 'noredist'. I was
>> building
>> >> > in nonoss previously. I am guessing I should use the noredist flag
>> now?
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Will - what is causing this to be noredist/nonoss? My quick perusal of
>> >> your patch didn't surface anything that would push it into that
>> >> category.
>> >>
>> >> --David
>> >>
>>
>
>

Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master

Posted by Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>.

Thanks for that David.  You are absolutely correct, this plugin has no
dependencies on any 3rd party code at build or runtime.  Everything the
plugin requires is built into the plugin.  I was unclear if its dependance
on a 3rd party API and appliance to be functional was relevant.

I think you are right.  I think it should probably be in the core build.  I
will make that change when I merge in the latest master for Sheng and
rebuild the patch.

Thanks,

Will


On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 10:19 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:

> So perhaps a bit of history.
>
> nonoss/noredist is for targets that aren't built 'by default' (e.g.
> you must explicitly turn them on). We do this because the ASF wants
> the default build to be truly unencumbered and where there are
> dependencies on non-open source, or non-Apache compatible code, we
> typically turn them off. In example: historically, Netscaler libraries
> were not open source, and we had a dependency on those libraries, so
> we placed the netscaler plugin into the nonoss. Since then the
> netscaler libraries have been open sourced, and we could move those
> out of noredist.
>
> So - is there third party code that you have as a build or runtime
> dependency? If so what is the license for that third party code? (My
> really fast perusal didn't catch anything that was immediately
> troubling)
>
> --David
>
> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>
> wrote:
> > Its dependence on a third party API and appliance, similar to the srx and
> > netscaler. I am not convinced it should be in noredist, but I was
> following
> > the same model as other similar plugins.  Feedback on this would be
> > helpful.
> >
> > Ws
> >
> > On Tuesday, November 5, 2013, David Nalley wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Will Stevens <wstevens@cloudops.com
> <javascript:;>>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Sheng, I will rebuild the patch for the latest master.  The latest
> master
> >> > has depreciated the 'nonoss' flag in favour of 'noredist'. I was
> building
> >> > in nonoss previously. I am guessing I should use the noredist flag
> now?
> >> >
> >>
> >> Will - what is causing this to be noredist/nonoss? My quick perusal of
> >> your patch didn't surface anything that would push it into that
> >> category.
> >>
> >> --David
> >>
>

Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master

Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.

So perhaps a bit of history.

nonoss/noredist is for targets that aren't built 'by default' (e.g.
you must explicitly turn them on). We do this because the ASF wants
the default build to be truly unencumbered and where there are
dependencies on non-open source, or non-Apache compatible code, we
typically turn them off. In example: historically, Netscaler libraries
were not open source, and we had a dependency on those libraries, so
we placed the netscaler plugin into the nonoss. Since then the
netscaler libraries have been open sourced, and we could move those
out of noredist.

So - is there third party code that you have as a build or runtime
dependency? If so what is the license for that third party code? (My
really fast perusal didn't catch anything that was immediately
troubling)

--David

On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com> wrote:
> Its dependence on a third party API and appliance, similar to the srx and
> netscaler. I am not convinced it should be in noredist, but I was following
> the same model as other similar plugins.  Feedback on this would be
> helpful.
>
> Ws
>
> On Tuesday, November 5, 2013, David Nalley wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Will Stevens <wstevens@cloudops.com<javascript:;>>
>> wrote:
>> > Sheng, I will rebuild the patch for the latest master.  The latest master
>> > has depreciated the 'nonoss' flag in favour of 'noredist'. I was building
>> > in nonoss previously. I am guessing I should use the noredist flag now?
>> >
>>
>> Will - what is causing this to be noredist/nonoss? My quick perusal of
>> your patch didn't surface anything that would push it into that
>> category.
>>
>> --David
>>

Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master

Posted by Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>.

Its dependence on a third party API and appliance, similar to the srx and
netscaler. I am not convinced it should be in noredist, but I was following
the same model as other similar plugins.  Feedback on this would be
helpful.

Ws

On Tuesday, November 5, 2013, David Nalley wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Will Stevens <wstevens@cloudops.com<javascript:;>>
> wrote:
> > Sheng, I will rebuild the patch for the latest master.  The latest master
> > has depreciated the 'nonoss' flag in favour of 'noredist'. I was building
> > in nonoss previously. I am guessing I should use the noredist flag now?
> >
>
> Will - what is causing this to be noredist/nonoss? My quick perusal of
> your patch didn't surface anything that would push it into that
> category.
>
> --David
>

Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master

Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.

On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com> wrote:
> Sheng, I will rebuild the patch for the latest master.  The latest master
> has depreciated the 'nonoss' flag in favour of 'noredist'. I was building
> in nonoss previously. I am guessing I should use the noredist flag now?
>

Will - what is causing this to be noredist/nonoss? My quick perusal of
your patch didn't surface anything that would push it into that
category.

--David

Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master

Posted by Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>.

Sheng, I will rebuild the patch for the latest master.  The latest master
has depreciated the 'nonoss' flag in favour of 'noredist'. I was building
in nonoss previously. I am guessing I should use the noredist flag now?

Cheers,

Will

On Monday, November 4, 2013, Sheng Yang wrote:

> Sure, I would be glad to commit it for 4.3 release.
>
> --Sheng
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 8:19 AM, Chip Childers <chipchilders@apache.org<javascript:;>
> >wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 10:59:30AM -0500, Will Stevens wrote:
> > > Well its not in master yet.  That is the intent of this thread...
> > >
> > > I can definitely do some testing for the 4.3 test cycle.
> > >
> > > Will
> >
> > Shoot, I misread Sheng's email.  Sorry about that.  I thought he said
> > that he "Checked *in*" the code, not "Checked out".
> >
> > Duh... my bad.
> >
> > Sheng, as the reviewer, want to handle the commit?
> >
>

Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master

Posted by Sheng Yang <sh...@yasker.org>.

Sure, I would be glad to commit it for 4.3 release.

--Sheng


On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 8:19 AM, Chip Childers <ch...@apache.org>wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 10:59:30AM -0500, Will Stevens wrote:
> > Well its not in master yet.  That is the intent of this thread...
> >
> > I can definitely do some testing for the 4.3 test cycle.
> >
> > Will
>
> Shoot, I misread Sheng's email.  Sorry about that.  I thought he said
> that he "Checked *in*" the code, not "Checked out".
>
> Duh... my bad.
>
> Sheng, as the reviewer, want to handle the commit?
>

Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master

Posted by Chip Childers <ch...@apache.org>.

On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 10:59:30AM -0500, Will Stevens wrote:
> Well its not in master yet.  That is the intent of this thread...
> 
> I can definitely do some testing for the 4.3 test cycle.
> 
> Will

Shoot, I misread Sheng's email.  Sorry about that.  I thought he said
that he "Checked *in*" the code, not "Checked out".

Duh... my bad.

Sheng, as the reviewer, want to handle the commit?

Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master

Posted by Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>.

Well its not in master yet.  That is the intent of this thread...

I can definitely do some testing for the 4.3 test cycle.

Will

On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Chip Childers <ch...@apache.org>wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 10:49:29AM -0500, Will Stevens wrote:
> > Anything I can do to help get this patch into 4.3.0?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Will
>
> If it's in master, it'll be in 4.3...  so help by testing during the 4.3
> test cycle!
>
> -chip
>

Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master

Posted by Chip Childers <ch...@apache.org>.

On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 10:49:29AM -0500, Will Stevens wrote:
> Anything I can do to help get this patch into 4.3.0?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Will

If it's in master, it'll be in 4.3...  so help by testing during the 4.3
test cycle!

-chip

Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master

Posted by Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>.

Anything I can do to help get this patch into 4.3.0?

Thanks,

Will


On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Sheng Yang <sh...@yasker.org> wrote:

> Nice work Will!
>
> I've checked the code, it included the UI part and unit test as well.
> Really impressed!
>
> Just one comment: you can git-format-patch to generate the patch. It would
> includes author and description information automatically, which is easier
> for applying.
>
> +1!
>
> --Sheng
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I would like to merge support for Palo Alto Network's firewall appliances
> > to the master branch.  Development for this has been done by Will Stevens
> > at CloudOps on branch [1].
> >
> > There was an introduction [2], a proposal [3], and a discussion [4] on
> the
> > mailing list regarding this feature.
> >
> > Checklist:
> > Jira ticket for the feature is here [5].
> > The FS can be found at [6].
> > Unit tests for the feature are available at [7] and [8].  I have
> developed
> > the unit tests with a flag to output additional detail in the console
> [9].
> >  Here is the result of the tests without detail [10] and here is the
> result
> > of the tests with detail [11].
> >
> > This plugin communicates to the Palo Alto Networks firewall appliances
> > through an API documented at [12] with a training manual [13].
> > This plugin depends on a modification to core to remove a limitation
> which
> > was discussed here [14], with this jira issue [15] and has been approved
> > here [16].
> > This plugin is being reviewed at [17] according to this patch [18].
> >
> > There are no 3rd party libraries needed for this plugin, however it does
> > depend on a 3rd party API [12][13] to orchestrate the configuration on
> the
> > appliance.  The plugin is currently being built via the 'nonoss' flag.
>  It
> > should be moved into either the 'noredist' or core because it appears
> that
> > 'nonoss' will be going away [19] and 'noredist' has been merged [20].  I
> > would appreciate input on which build this should be put into given its
> > interaction with an 3rd party appliance.
> >
> > Here are the slides for a presentation [21] given about this integration
> at
> > the CloudStack Collaboration Conference in Santa Clara, CA.
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/cloudops/cs_palo_alto/tree/palo_alto
> > [2]
> >
> >
> http://markmail.org/message/hukydzwkec3dwuxq?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Palo+Alto
> > [3]
> >
> >
> http://markmail.org/message/odbg2icft7esj3ut?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Palo+Alto
> > [4]
> >
> >
> http://markmail.org/message/n5276i4hfh7ek57o?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Palo+Alto
> > [5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-1275
> > [6]
> >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Palo+Alto+Firewall+Integration
> > [7]
> >
> >
> https://github.com/cloudops/cs_palo_alto/blob/palo_alto/plugins/network-elements/palo-alto/test/com/cloud/network/resource/PaloAltoResourceTest.java
> > [8]
> >
> >
> https://github.com/cloudops/cs_palo_alto/blob/palo_alto/plugins/network-elements/palo-alto/test/com/cloud/network/resource/MockablePaloAltoResource.java
> > [9]
> >
> >
> https://github.com/cloudops/cs_palo_alto/blob/palo_alto/plugins/network-elements/palo-alto/test/com/cloud/network/resource/PaloAltoResourceTest.java#L156
> > [10]
> >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/palo_alto_tests_without_logging.txt?version=1&modificationDate=1383248404474
> > [11]
> >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/palo_alto_tests_with_logging.txt?version=1&modificationDate=1383248432061
> > [12]
> >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/XML-API-5-1.0-RevA.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1366305634000
> > [13]
> >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/XML_API_Training.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1366305635000
> > [14]
> >
> >
> http://markmail.org/message/374hyn7ko6zrb2cf?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+supported+source+nat+types
> > [15] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-4991
> > [16] https://reviews.apache.org/r/15047/
> > [17] https://reviews.apache.org/r/15050/
> > [18] https://reviews.apache.org/r/15050/diff/
> > [19]
> >
> >
> http://markmail.org/message/37qcg4lgudmf57ws?q=DISCUSS%5D+rename+nonoss+to+noredist
> > [20]
> >
> >
> http://markmail.org/message/zqkiuod5qabcyra6?q=%5BMERGE%5D+changing+nonoss+to+noredist
> > [21]
> >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/CS_PA_Integration.pptx?version=1&modificationDate=1383250830719
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Will
> >
>

Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master

Posted by Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>.

Great, thank you Sheng...

I have updated the diff for the patch review with a new version which was
created using the 'git format-patch' format.

A note that may help others.  I found this very helpful when squashing my
branch of changes to a patch for master:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/616556/how-do-you-squash-commits-into-one-patch-with-git-format-patch?answertab=votes#tab-top


On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Sheng Yang <sh...@yasker.org> wrote:

> Nice work Will!
>
> I've checked the code, it included the UI part and unit test as well.
> Really impressed!
>
> Just one comment: you can git-format-patch to generate the patch. It would
> includes author and description information automatically, which is easier
> for applying.
>
> +1!
>
> --Sheng
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I would like to merge support for Palo Alto Network's firewall appliances
> > to the master branch.  Development for this has been done by Will Stevens
> > at CloudOps on branch [1].
> >
> > There was an introduction [2], a proposal [3], and a discussion [4] on
> the
> > mailing list regarding this feature.
> >
> > Checklist:
> > Jira ticket for the feature is here [5].
> > The FS can be found at [6].
> > Unit tests for the feature are available at [7] and [8].  I have
> developed
> > the unit tests with a flag to output additional detail in the console
> [9].
> >  Here is the result of the tests without detail [10] and here is the
> result
> > of the tests with detail [11].
> >
> > This plugin communicates to the Palo Alto Networks firewall appliances
> > through an API documented at [12] with a training manual [13].
> > This plugin depends on a modification to core to remove a limitation
> which
> > was discussed here [14], with this jira issue [15] and has been approved
> > here [16].
> > This plugin is being reviewed at [17] according to this patch [18].
> >
> > There are no 3rd party libraries needed for this plugin, however it does
> > depend on a 3rd party API [12][13] to orchestrate the configuration on
> the
> > appliance.  The plugin is currently being built via the 'nonoss' flag.
>  It
> > should be moved into either the 'noredist' or core because it appears
> that
> > 'nonoss' will be going away [19] and 'noredist' has been merged [20].  I
> > would appreciate input on which build this should be put into given its
> > interaction with an 3rd party appliance.
> >
> > Here are the slides for a presentation [21] given about this integration
> at
> > the CloudStack Collaboration Conference in Santa Clara, CA.
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/cloudops/cs_palo_alto/tree/palo_alto
> > [2]
> >
> >
> http://markmail.org/message/hukydzwkec3dwuxq?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Palo+Alto
> > [3]
> >
> >
> http://markmail.org/message/odbg2icft7esj3ut?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Palo+Alto
> > [4]
> >
> >
> http://markmail.org/message/n5276i4hfh7ek57o?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Palo+Alto
> > [5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-1275
> > [6]
> >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Palo+Alto+Firewall+Integration
> > [7]
> >
> >
> https://github.com/cloudops/cs_palo_alto/blob/palo_alto/plugins/network-elements/palo-alto/test/com/cloud/network/resource/PaloAltoResourceTest.java
> > [8]
> >
> >
> https://github.com/cloudops/cs_palo_alto/blob/palo_alto/plugins/network-elements/palo-alto/test/com/cloud/network/resource/MockablePaloAltoResource.java
> > [9]
> >
> >
> https://github.com/cloudops/cs_palo_alto/blob/palo_alto/plugins/network-elements/palo-alto/test/com/cloud/network/resource/PaloAltoResourceTest.java#L156
> > [10]
> >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/palo_alto_tests_without_logging.txt?version=1&modificationDate=1383248404474
> > [11]
> >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/palo_alto_tests_with_logging.txt?version=1&modificationDate=1383248432061
> > [12]
> >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/XML-API-5-1.0-RevA.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1366305634000
> > [13]
> >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/XML_API_Training.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1366305635000
> > [14]
> >
> >
> http://markmail.org/message/374hyn7ko6zrb2cf?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+supported+source+nat+types
> > [15] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-4991
> > [16] https://reviews.apache.org/r/15047/
> > [17] https://reviews.apache.org/r/15050/
> > [18] https://reviews.apache.org/r/15050/diff/
> > [19]
> >
> >
> http://markmail.org/message/37qcg4lgudmf57ws?q=DISCUSS%5D+rename+nonoss+to+noredist
> > [20]
> >
> >
> http://markmail.org/message/zqkiuod5qabcyra6?q=%5BMERGE%5D+changing+nonoss+to+noredist
> > [21]
> >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/CS_PA_Integration.pptx?version=1&modificationDate=1383250830719
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Will
> >
>

Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master

Posted by Sheng Yang <sh...@yasker.org>.

Nice work Will!

I've checked the code, it included the UI part and unit test as well.
Really impressed!

Just one comment: you can git-format-patch to generate the patch. It would
includes author and description information automatically, which is easier
for applying.

+1!

--Sheng



On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I would like to merge support for Palo Alto Network's firewall appliances
> to the master branch.  Development for this has been done by Will Stevens
> at CloudOps on branch [1].
>
> There was an introduction [2], a proposal [3], and a discussion [4] on the
> mailing list regarding this feature.
>
> Checklist:
> Jira ticket for the feature is here [5].
> The FS can be found at [6].
> Unit tests for the feature are available at [7] and [8].  I have developed
> the unit tests with a flag to output additional detail in the console [9].
>  Here is the result of the tests without detail [10] and here is the result
> of the tests with detail [11].
>
> This plugin communicates to the Palo Alto Networks firewall appliances
> through an API documented at [12] with a training manual [13].
> This plugin depends on a modification to core to remove a limitation which
> was discussed here [14], with this jira issue [15] and has been approved
> here [16].
> This plugin is being reviewed at [17] according to this patch [18].
>
> There are no 3rd party libraries needed for this plugin, however it does
> depend on a 3rd party API [12][13] to orchestrate the configuration on the
> appliance.  The plugin is currently being built via the 'nonoss' flag.  It
> should be moved into either the 'noredist' or core because it appears that
> 'nonoss' will be going away [19] and 'noredist' has been merged [20].  I
> would appreciate input on which build this should be put into given its
> interaction with an 3rd party appliance.
>
> Here are the slides for a presentation [21] given about this integration at
> the CloudStack Collaboration Conference in Santa Clara, CA.
>
> [1] https://github.com/cloudops/cs_palo_alto/tree/palo_alto
> [2]
>
> http://markmail.org/message/hukydzwkec3dwuxq?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Palo+Alto
> [3]
>
> http://markmail.org/message/odbg2icft7esj3ut?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Palo+Alto
> [4]
>
> http://markmail.org/message/n5276i4hfh7ek57o?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Palo+Alto
> [5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-1275
> [6]
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Palo+Alto+Firewall+Integration
> [7]
>
> https://github.com/cloudops/cs_palo_alto/blob/palo_alto/plugins/network-elements/palo-alto/test/com/cloud/network/resource/PaloAltoResourceTest.java
> [8]
>
> https://github.com/cloudops/cs_palo_alto/blob/palo_alto/plugins/network-elements/palo-alto/test/com/cloud/network/resource/MockablePaloAltoResource.java
> [9]
>
> https://github.com/cloudops/cs_palo_alto/blob/palo_alto/plugins/network-elements/palo-alto/test/com/cloud/network/resource/PaloAltoResourceTest.java#L156
> [10]
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/palo_alto_tests_without_logging.txt?version=1&modificationDate=1383248404474
> [11]
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/palo_alto_tests_with_logging.txt?version=1&modificationDate=1383248432061
> [12]
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/XML-API-5-1.0-RevA.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1366305634000
> [13]
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/XML_API_Training.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1366305635000
> [14]
>
> http://markmail.org/message/374hyn7ko6zrb2cf?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+supported+source+nat+types
> [15] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-4991
> [16] https://reviews.apache.org/r/15047/
> [17] https://reviews.apache.org/r/15050/
> [18] https://reviews.apache.org/r/15050/diff/
> [19]
>
> http://markmail.org/message/37qcg4lgudmf57ws?q=DISCUSS%5D+rename+nonoss+to+noredist
> [20]
>
> http://markmail.org/message/zqkiuod5qabcyra6?q=%5BMERGE%5D+changing+nonoss+to+noredist
> [21]
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/CS_PA_Integration.pptx?version=1&modificationDate=1383250830719
>
> Cheers,
>
> Will
>

Re: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master

Posted by Will Stevens <ws...@cloudops.com>.

Sorry, I thought I had responded to you on this, but I just realized I
hadn't.  I tested all my functionality a couple days ago and everything is
working so this issue is resolved.

Thanks...


On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 6:14 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi <
animesh.chaturvedi@citrix.com> wrote:

> Will
>
> I was doing some housekeeping for release and noticed that the  JIRA
> ticket [5] was unresolved and not tagged for 4.3. I have updated it as
> resolved and tagged for 4.3. Let me know if this is not correct
>
> Animesh
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: williamstevens@gmail.com [mailto:williamstevens@gmail.com] On
> Behalf Of Will Stevens
> Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2013 1:51 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master
>
> Hi,
>
> I would like to merge support for Palo Alto Network's firewall appliances
> to the master branch.  Development for this has been done by Will Stevens
> at CloudOps on branch [1].
>
> There was an introduction [2], a proposal [3], and a discussion [4] on the
> mailing list regarding this feature.
>
> Checklist:
> Jira ticket for the feature is here [5].
> The FS can be found at [6].
> Unit tests for the feature are available at [7] and [8].  I have developed
> the unit tests with a flag to output additional detail in the console [9].
>  Here is the result of the tests without detail [10] and here is the
> result of the tests with detail [11].
>
> This plugin communicates to the Palo Alto Networks firewall appliances
> through an API documented at [12] with a training manual [13].
> This plugin depends on a modification to core to remove a limitation which
> was discussed here [14], with this jira issue [15] and has been approved
> here [16].
> This plugin is being reviewed at [17] according to this patch [18].
>
> There are no 3rd party libraries needed for this plugin, however it does
> depend on a 3rd party API [12][13] to orchestrate the configuration on the
> appliance.  The plugin is currently being built via the 'nonoss' flag.  It
> should be moved into either the 'noredist' or core because it appears that
> 'nonoss' will be going away [19] and 'noredist' has been merged [20].  I
> would appreciate input on which build this should be put into given its
> interaction with an 3rd party appliance.
>
> Here are the slides for a presentation [21] given about this integration
> at the CloudStack Collaboration Conference in Santa Clara, CA.
>
> [1] https://github.com/cloudops/cs_palo_alto/tree/palo_alto
> [2]
>
> http://markmail.org/message/hukydzwkec3dwuxq?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Palo+Alto
> [3]
>
> http://markmail.org/message/odbg2icft7esj3ut?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Palo+Alto
> [4]
>
> http://markmail.org/message/n5276i4hfh7ek57o?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Palo+Alto
> [5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-1275
> [6]
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Palo+Alto+Firewall+Integration
> [7]
>
> https://github.com/cloudops/cs_palo_alto/blob/palo_alto/plugins/network-elements/palo-alto/test/com/cloud/network/resource/PaloAltoResourceTest.java
> [8]
>
> https://github.com/cloudops/cs_palo_alto/blob/palo_alto/plugins/network-elements/palo-alto/test/com/cloud/network/resource/MockablePaloAltoResource.java
> [9]
>
> https://github.com/cloudops/cs_palo_alto/blob/palo_alto/plugins/network-elements/palo-alto/test/com/cloud/network/resource/PaloAltoResourceTest.java#L156
> [10]
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/palo_alto_tests_without_logging.txt?version=1&modificationDate=1383248404474
> [11]
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/palo_alto_tests_with_logging.txt?version=1&modificationDate=1383248432061
> [12]
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/XML-API-5-1.0-RevA.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1366305634000
> [13]
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/XML_API_Training.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1366305635000
> [14]
>
> http://markmail.org/message/374hyn7ko6zrb2cf?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+supported+source+nat+types
> [15] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-4991
> [16] https://reviews.apache.org/r/15047/
> [17] https://reviews.apache.org/r/15050/
> [18] https://reviews.apache.org/r/15050/diff/
> [19]
>
> http://markmail.org/message/37qcg4lgudmf57ws?q=DISCUSS%5D+rename+nonoss+to+noredist
> [20]
>
> http://markmail.org/message/zqkiuod5qabcyra6?q=%5BMERGE%5D+changing+nonoss+to+noredist
> [21]
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/CS_PA_Integration.pptx?version=1&modificationDate=1383250830719
>
> Cheers,
>
> Will
>

RE: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master

Posted by Animesh Chaturvedi <an...@citrix.com>.

Will

I was doing some housekeeping for release and noticed that the  JIRA ticket [5] was unresolved and not tagged for 4.3. I have updated it as resolved and tagged for 4.3. Let me know if this is not correct

Animesh

-----Original Message-----
From: williamstevens@gmail.com [mailto:williamstevens@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Will Stevens
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2013 1:51 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: [Merge] Palo Alto Networks firewall integration to master

Hi,

I would like to merge support for Palo Alto Network's firewall appliances to the master branch.  Development for this has been done by Will Stevens at CloudOps on branch [1].

There was an introduction [2], a proposal [3], and a discussion [4] on the mailing list regarding this feature.

Checklist:
Jira ticket for the feature is here [5].
The FS can be found at [6].
Unit tests for the feature are available at [7] and [8].  I have developed the unit tests with a flag to output additional detail in the console [9].
 Here is the result of the tests without detail [10] and here is the result of the tests with detail [11].

This plugin communicates to the Palo Alto Networks firewall appliances through an API documented at [12] with a training manual [13].
This plugin depends on a modification to core to remove a limitation which was discussed here [14], with this jira issue [15] and has been approved here [16].
This plugin is being reviewed at [17] according to this patch [18].

There are no 3rd party libraries needed for this plugin, however it does depend on a 3rd party API [12][13] to orchestrate the configuration on the appliance.  The plugin is currently being built via the 'nonoss' flag.  It should be moved into either the 'noredist' or core because it appears that 'nonoss' will be going away [19] and 'noredist' has been merged [20].  I would appreciate input on which build this should be put into given its interaction with an 3rd party appliance.

Here are the slides for a presentation [21] given about this integration at the CloudStack Collaboration Conference in Santa Clara, CA.

[1] https://github.com/cloudops/cs_palo_alto/tree/palo_alto
[2]
http://markmail.org/message/hukydzwkec3dwuxq?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Palo+Alto
[3]
http://markmail.org/message/odbg2icft7esj3ut?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Palo+Alto
[4]
http://markmail.org/message/n5276i4hfh7ek57o?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+Palo+Alto
[5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-1275
[6]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Palo+Alto+Firewall+Integration
[7]
https://github.com/cloudops/cs_palo_alto/blob/palo_alto/plugins/network-elements/palo-alto/test/com/cloud/network/resource/PaloAltoResourceTest.java
[8]
https://github.com/cloudops/cs_palo_alto/blob/palo_alto/plugins/network-elements/palo-alto/test/com/cloud/network/resource/MockablePaloAltoResource.java
[9]
https://github.com/cloudops/cs_palo_alto/blob/palo_alto/plugins/network-elements/palo-alto/test/com/cloud/network/resource/PaloAltoResourceTest.java#L156
[10]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/palo_alto_tests_without_logging.txt?version=1&modificationDate=1383248404474
[11]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/palo_alto_tests_with_logging.txt?version=1&modificationDate=1383248432061
[12]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/XML-API-5-1.0-RevA.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1366305634000
[13]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/XML_API_Training.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1366305635000
[14]
http://markmail.org/message/374hyn7ko6zrb2cf?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-%2A+supported+source+nat+types
[15] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-4991
[16] https://reviews.apache.org/r/15047/
[17] https://reviews.apache.org/r/15050/
[18] https://reviews.apache.org/r/15050/diff/
[19]
http://markmail.org/message/37qcg4lgudmf57ws?q=DISCUSS%5D+rename+nonoss+to+noredist
[20]
http://markmail.org/message/zqkiuod5qabcyra6?q=%5BMERGE%5D+changing+nonoss+to+noredist
[21]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/30753712/CS_PA_Integration.pptx?version=1&modificationDate=1383250830719

Cheers,

Will

Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Posted by Marcus <sh...@gmail.com>.

I should mention that by default the squashed commit wraps the whole
history up into the commit message. Also, my original comment was more of a
question, as I know this topic has already been thoroughly discussed but I
didn't remember what we were supposed to be doing.
On Mar 15, 2014 7:41 AM, "Marcus" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Yeah, I've been down that road before and its not always fun.
> On Mar 15, 2014 4:49 AM, "Rajani Karuturi" <Ra...@citrix.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I think preserving the history is important. Especially for the developer
>> to understand the history if it and why he did it this way.
>>
>> branch merges can also be easily reverted if required.
>> http://git-scm.com/blog/2010/03/02/undoing-merges.html
>>
>> https://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/howto/revert-a-faulty-merge.txt
>>
>>
>> ~Rajani
>>
>>
>>
>> On 14-Mar-2014, at 11:50 pm, Chiradeep Vittal <
>> Chiradeep.Vittal@citrix.com<ma...@citrix.com>> wrote:
>>
>> For a new feature, I'd agree that squashed-merge is better.
>>
>> From: Marcus <sh...@gmail.com><mailto:
>> shadowsor@gmail.com>>
>> Reply-To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> ><ma...@cloudstack.apache.org>" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:
>> dev@cloudstack.apache.org><ma...@cloudstack.apache.org>>
>> Date: Friday, March 14, 2014 at 10:05 AM
>> To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org<ma...@cloudstack.apache.org><mailto:
>> dev@cloudstack.apache.org>" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:
>> dev@cloudstack.apache.org><ma...@cloudstack.apache.org>>
>> Subject: Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master
>>
>> Maybe, although to some extent the action of merging I think should be
>> seen as saying "this is complete". If the history is important, it
>> could perhaps be kept around in the feature branch until it becomes
>> irrelevant. Of course it may have minor issues that aren't known, but
>> I think the ability to preserve master and easily be able to roll back
>> an entire feature is attractive.
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Prachi Damle <Prachi.Damle@citrix.com
>> <ma...@citrix.com>> wrote:
>> Just a thought about the squashed merge, if there are multiple developers
>> working on a feature branch as in this case, won't it be better to preserve
>> the change history?
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Min Chen [mailto:min.chen@citrix.com]
>> Sent: Friday, March 14, 2014 9:35 AM
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org<ma...@cloudstack.apache.org><mailto:
>> dev@cloudstack.apache.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master
>>
>> Thanks Marcus. I am not aware of this convention, will remember that next
>> time when I do the merge.
>>
>> -min
>>
>> On 3/13/14 10:30 PM, "Marcus" <shadowsor@gmail.com<mailto:
>> shadowsor@gmail.com><ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Min, in looking at this branch merge, I need to be reminded whether we
>> are supposed to squash feature branches when they come in, or preserve
>> history. It's nice to preserve history, but it's a lot easier to undo a
>> squashed merge.
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Min Chen <min.chen@citrix.com<mailto:
>> min.chen@citrix.com><ma...@citrix.com>> wrote:
>> IAM branch is now merged to master.
>>
>> Thanks
>> -min
>>
>> On 3/13/14 10:13 AM, "Min Chen" <min.chen@citrix.com<mailto:
>> min.chen@citrix.com><ma...@citrix.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Since we haven't heard of any objections to this merge for 3 days, I
>> am going to merge it to master today.
>>
>> Thanks
>> -min
>>
>> On 3/11/14 12:23 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hugo@trippaers.nl<mailto:
>> hugo@trippaers.nl><ma...@trippaers.nl>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 11 mrt. 2014, at 19:52, Min Chen <min.chen@citrix.com<mailto:
>> min.chen@citrix.com><ma...@citrix.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Also, have already run FingBugs on our branch and addressed all
>> new findings introduced by our branch.
>>
>> Awesome! :-)
>>
>>
>> Thanks.
>> -min
>>
>> On 3/10/14 7:33 PM, "Min Chen" <min.chen@citrix.com<mailto:
>> min.chen@citrix.com><ma...@citrix.com>> wrote:
>>
>> No new jar dependencies.
>>
>> -min
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>> <Ch...@citrix.com><mailto:
>> Chiradeep.Vittal@citrix.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Any new jar dependencies?
>>
>> On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min Chen" <min.chen@citrix.com<mailto:
>> min.chen@citrix.com><ma...@citrix.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and Access
>> Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch.
>> Development for  this effort has been done by Prachi and me on
>> ACS rbac branch
>>
>>
>> (https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shor
>> tlo
>> g;
>> h
>> =r
>> ef
>> s/heads/rbac).
>> Checklists for the merge:
>> 1. JIRA ticket:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
>> 2. Functional Specs:
>>
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStac
>> k+I
>> de
>> n
>> ti
>> ty
>> +and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed this
>> feature
>> back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our
>> implementation.
>> 3. Unit tests for the feature are available at:
>> services/iam/server/test
>> (for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam plugin).
>> 4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available at:
>> test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
>> 5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit
>> 63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
>> 6. RAT test has been passed.
>>
>> Thanks.
>> -min
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Posted by Marcus <sh...@gmail.com>.

Yeah, I've been down that road before and its not always fun.
On Mar 15, 2014 4:49 AM, "Rajani Karuturi" <Ra...@citrix.com>
wrote:

> I think preserving the history is important. Especially for the developer
> to understand the history if it and why he did it this way.
>
> branch merges can also be easily reverted if required.
> http://git-scm.com/blog/2010/03/02/undoing-merges.html
>
> https://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/howto/revert-a-faulty-merge.txt
>
>
> ~Rajani
>
>
>
> On 14-Mar-2014, at 11:50 pm, Chiradeep Vittal <Chiradeep.Vittal@citrix.com
> <ma...@citrix.com>> wrote:
>
> For a new feature, I'd agree that squashed-merge is better.
>
> From: Marcus <sh...@gmail.com><mailto:
> shadowsor@gmail.com>>
> Reply-To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> ><ma...@cloudstack.apache.org>" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:
> dev@cloudstack.apache.org><ma...@cloudstack.apache.org>>
> Date: Friday, March 14, 2014 at 10:05 AM
> To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org<ma...@cloudstack.apache.org><mailto:
> dev@cloudstack.apache.org>" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:
> dev@cloudstack.apache.org><ma...@cloudstack.apache.org>>
> Subject: Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master
>
> Maybe, although to some extent the action of merging I think should be
> seen as saying "this is complete". If the history is important, it
> could perhaps be kept around in the feature branch until it becomes
> irrelevant. Of course it may have minor issues that aren't known, but
> I think the ability to preserve master and easily be able to roll back
> an entire feature is attractive.
>
> On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Prachi Damle <Prachi.Damle@citrix.com
> <ma...@citrix.com>> wrote:
> Just a thought about the squashed merge, if there are multiple developers
> working on a feature branch as in this case, won't it be better to preserve
> the change history?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Min Chen [mailto:min.chen@citrix.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 14, 2014 9:35 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org<ma...@cloudstack.apache.org><mailto:
> dev@cloudstack.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master
>
> Thanks Marcus. I am not aware of this convention, will remember that next
> time when I do the merge.
>
> -min
>
> On 3/13/14 10:30 PM, "Marcus" <shadowsor@gmail.com<mailto:
> shadowsor@gmail.com><ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Min, in looking at this branch merge, I need to be reminded whether we
> are supposed to squash feature branches when they come in, or preserve
> history. It's nice to preserve history, but it's a lot easier to undo a
> squashed merge.
>
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Min Chen <min.chen@citrix.com<mailto:
> min.chen@citrix.com><ma...@citrix.com>> wrote:
> IAM branch is now merged to master.
>
> Thanks
> -min
>
> On 3/13/14 10:13 AM, "Min Chen" <min.chen@citrix.com<mailto:
> min.chen@citrix.com><ma...@citrix.com>> wrote:
>
> Since we haven't heard of any objections to this merge for 3 days, I
> am going to merge it to master today.
>
> Thanks
> -min
>
> On 3/11/14 12:23 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hugo@trippaers.nl<mailto:
> hugo@trippaers.nl><ma...@trippaers.nl>> wrote:
>
>
> On 11 mrt. 2014, at 19:52, Min Chen <min.chen@citrix.com<mailto:
> min.chen@citrix.com><ma...@citrix.com>> wrote:
>
> Also, have already run FingBugs on our branch and addressed all
> new findings introduced by our branch.
>
> Awesome! :-)
>
>
> Thanks.
> -min
>
> On 3/10/14 7:33 PM, "Min Chen" <min.chen@citrix.com<mailto:
> min.chen@citrix.com><ma...@citrix.com>> wrote:
>
> No new jar dependencies.
>
> -min
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
> <Ch...@citrix.com><mailto:
> Chiradeep.Vittal@citrix.com>> wrote:
>
> Any new jar dependencies?
>
> On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min Chen" <min.chen@citrix.com<mailto:
> min.chen@citrix.com><ma...@citrix.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and Access
> Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch.
> Development for  this effort has been done by Prachi and me on
> ACS rbac branch
>
>
> (https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shor
> tlo
> g;
> h
> =r
> ef
> s/heads/rbac).
> Checklists for the merge:
> 1. JIRA ticket:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
> 2. Functional Specs:
>
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStac
> k+I
> de
> n
> ti
> ty
> +and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed this
> feature
> back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our
> implementation.
> 3. Unit tests for the feature are available at:
> services/iam/server/test
> (for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam plugin).
> 4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available at:
> test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
> 5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit
> 63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
> 6. RAT test has been passed.
>
> Thanks.
> -min
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Posted by Rajani Karuturi <Ra...@citrix.com>.

I think preserving the history is important. Especially for the developer to understand the history if it and why he did it this way.

branch merges can also be easily reverted if required.
http://git-scm.com/blog/2010/03/02/undoing-merges.html
https://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/howto/revert-a-faulty-merge.txt


~Rajani



On 14-Mar-2014, at 11:50 pm, Chiradeep Vittal <Ch...@citrix.com>> wrote:

For a new feature, I’d agree that squashed-merge is better.

From: Marcus <sh...@gmail.com>>
Reply-To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org<ma...@cloudstack.apache.org>" <de...@cloudstack.apache.org>>
Date: Friday, March 14, 2014 at 10:05 AM
To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org<ma...@cloudstack.apache.org>" <de...@cloudstack.apache.org>>
Subject: Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Maybe, although to some extent the action of merging I think should be
seen as saying "this is complete". If the history is important, it
could perhaps be kept around in the feature branch until it becomes
irrelevant. Of course it may have minor issues that aren't known, but
I think the ability to preserve master and easily be able to roll back
an entire feature is attractive.

On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Prachi Damle <Pr...@citrix.com>> wrote:
Just a thought about the squashed merge, if there are multiple developers working on a feature branch as in this case, won't it be better to preserve the change history?

-----Original Message-----
From: Min Chen [mailto:min.chen@citrix.com]
Sent: Friday, March 14, 2014 9:35 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org<ma...@cloudstack.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Thanks Marcus. I am not aware of this convention, will remember that next time when I do the merge.

-min

On 3/13/14 10:30 PM, "Marcus" <sh...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Min, in looking at this branch merge, I need to be reminded whether we
are supposed to squash feature branches when they come in, or preserve
history. It's nice to preserve history, but it's a lot easier to undo a
squashed merge.

On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com>> wrote:
IAM branch is now merged to master.

Thanks
-min

On 3/13/14 10:13 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com>> wrote:

Since we haven't heard of any objections to this merge for 3 days, I
am going to merge it to master today.

Thanks
-min

On 3/11/14 12:23 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl>> wrote:


On 11 mrt. 2014, at 19:52, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com>> wrote:

Also, have already run FingBugs on our branch and addressed all
new findings introduced by our branch.

Awesome! :-)


Thanks.
-min

On 3/10/14 7:33 PM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com>> wrote:

No new jar dependencies.

-min

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
<Ch...@citrix.com>> wrote:

Any new jar dependencies?

On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com>> wrote:

Hi,

Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and Access
Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch.
Development for  this effort has been done by Prachi and me on
ACS rbac branch


(https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shor
tlo
g;
h
=r
ef
s/heads/rbac).
Checklists for the merge:
1. JIRA ticket:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
2. Functional Specs:


https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStac
k+I
de
n
ti
ty
+and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed this
feature
back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our
implementation.
3. Unit tests for the feature are available at:
services/iam/server/test
(for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam plugin).
4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available at:
test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit
63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
6. RAT test has been passed.

Thanks.
-min

Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Posted by Chiradeep Vittal <Ch...@citrix.com>.

For a new feature, I’d agree that squashed-merge is better.

From: Marcus <sh...@gmail.com>>
Reply-To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org<ma...@cloudstack.apache.org>" <de...@cloudstack.apache.org>>
Date: Friday, March 14, 2014 at 10:05 AM
To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org<ma...@cloudstack.apache.org>" <de...@cloudstack.apache.org>>
Subject: Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Maybe, although to some extent the action of merging I think should be
seen as saying "this is complete". If the history is important, it
could perhaps be kept around in the feature branch until it becomes
irrelevant. Of course it may have minor issues that aren't known, but
I think the ability to preserve master and easily be able to roll back
an entire feature is attractive.

On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Prachi Damle <Pr...@citrix.com>> wrote:
Just a thought about the squashed merge, if there are multiple developers working on a feature branch as in this case, won't it be better to preserve the change history?

-----Original Message-----
From: Min Chen [mailto:min.chen@citrix.com]
Sent: Friday, March 14, 2014 9:35 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org<ma...@cloudstack.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Thanks Marcus. I am not aware of this convention, will remember that next time when I do the merge.

-min

On 3/13/14 10:30 PM, "Marcus" <sh...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Min, in looking at this branch merge, I need to be reminded whether we
are supposed to squash feature branches when they come in, or preserve
history. It's nice to preserve history, but it's a lot easier to undo a
squashed merge.

On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com>> wrote:
IAM branch is now merged to master.

Thanks
-min

On 3/13/14 10:13 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com>> wrote:

Since we haven't heard of any objections to this merge for 3 days, I
am going to merge it to master today.

Thanks
-min

On 3/11/14 12:23 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl>> wrote:

On 11 mrt. 2014, at 19:52, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com>> wrote:

Also, have already run FingBugs on our branch and addressed all
new findings introduced by our branch.

Awesome! :-)

Thanks.
-min

On 3/10/14 7:33 PM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com>> wrote:

No new jar dependencies.

-min

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
<Ch...@citrix.com>> wrote:

Any new jar dependencies?

On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com>> wrote:

Hi,

Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and Access
Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch.
Development for  this effort has been done by Prachi and me on
ACS rbac branch

(https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shor
tlo
g;
h
=r
ef
s/heads/rbac).
Checklists for the merge:
1. JIRA ticket:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
2. Functional Specs:

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStac
k+I
de
n
ti
ty
+and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed this
feature
back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our
implementation.
3. Unit tests for the feature are available at:
services/iam/server/test
(for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam plugin).
4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available at:
test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit
63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
6. RAT test has been passed.

Thanks.
-min

Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Posted by Marcus <sh...@gmail.com>.

Maybe, although to some extent the action of merging I think should be
seen as saying "this is complete". If the history is important, it
could perhaps be kept around in the feature branch until it becomes
irrelevant. Of course it may have minor issues that aren't known, but
I think the ability to preserve master and easily be able to roll back
an entire feature is attractive.

On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Prachi Damle <Pr...@citrix.com> wrote:
> Just a thought about the squashed merge, if there are multiple developers working on a feature branch as in this case, won't it be better to preserve the change history?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Min Chen [mailto:min.chen@citrix.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 14, 2014 9:35 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master
>
> Thanks Marcus. I am not aware of this convention, will remember that next time when I do the merge.
>
> -min
>
> On 3/13/14 10:30 PM, "Marcus" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Min, in looking at this branch merge, I need to be reminded whether we
>>are supposed to squash feature branches when they come in, or preserve
>>history. It's nice to preserve history, but it's a lot easier to undo a
>>squashed merge.
>>
>>On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>> IAM branch is now merged to master.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> -min
>>>
>>> On 3/13/14 10:13 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Since we haven't heard of any objections to this merge for 3 days, I
>>>>am going to merge it to master today.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks
>>>>-min
>>>>
>>>>On 3/11/14 12:23 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>On 11 mrt. 2014, at 19:52, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, have already run FingBugs on our branch and addressed all
>>>>>> new findings introduced by our branch.
>>>>>
>>>>>Awesome! :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/10/14 7:33 PM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No new jar dependencies.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Any new jar dependencies?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and Access
>>>>>>>>> Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch.
>>>>>>>>>Development for  this effort has been done by Prachi and me on
>>>>>>>>>ACS rbac branch
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>(https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shor
>>>>>>>>>tlo
>>>>>>>>>g;
>>>>>>>>>h
>>>>>>>>>=r
>>>>>>>>> ef
>>>>>>>>> s/heads/rbac).
>>>>>>>>> Checklists for the merge:
>>>>>>>>> 1. JIRA ticket:
>>>>>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
>>>>>>>>> 2. Functional Specs:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStac
>>>>>>>>>k+I
>>>>>>>>>de
>>>>>>>>>n
>>>>>>>>>ti
>>>>>>>>> ty
>>>>>>>>> +and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed this
>>>>>>>>>feature
>>>>>>>>> back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our
>>>>>>>>>implementation.
>>>>>>>>> 3. Unit tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>>> services/iam/server/test
>>>>>>>>> (for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam plugin).
>>>>>>>>> 4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>>> test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
>>>>>>>>> 5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit
>>>>>>>>>63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
>>>>>>>>> 6. RAT test has been passed.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>

RE: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Posted by Prachi Damle <Pr...@citrix.com>.

Just a thought about the squashed merge, if there are multiple developers working on a feature branch as in this case, won't it be better to preserve the change history?

-----Original Message-----
From: Min Chen [mailto:min.chen@citrix.com] 
Sent: Friday, March 14, 2014 9:35 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Thanks Marcus. I am not aware of this convention, will remember that next time when I do the merge.

-min

On 3/13/14 10:30 PM, "Marcus" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Min, in looking at this branch merge, I need to be reminded whether we 
>are supposed to squash feature branches when they come in, or preserve 
>history. It's nice to preserve history, but it's a lot easier to undo a 
>squashed merge.
>
>On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>> IAM branch is now merged to master.
>>
>> Thanks
>> -min
>>
>> On 3/13/14 10:13 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Since we haven't heard of any objections to this merge for 3 days, I 
>>>am going to merge it to master today.
>>>
>>>Thanks
>>>-min
>>>
>>>On 3/11/14 12:23 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>On 11 mrt. 2014, at 19:52, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Also, have already run FingBugs on our branch and addressed all 
>>>>> new findings introduced by our branch.
>>>>
>>>>Awesome! :-)
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>> -min
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/10/14 7:33 PM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> No new jar dependencies.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Any new jar dependencies?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and Access
>>>>>>>> Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch. 
>>>>>>>>Development for  this effort has been done by Prachi and me on 
>>>>>>>>ACS rbac branch
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>(https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shor
>>>>>>>>tlo
>>>>>>>>g;
>>>>>>>>h
>>>>>>>>=r
>>>>>>>> ef
>>>>>>>> s/heads/rbac).
>>>>>>>> Checklists for the merge:
>>>>>>>> 1. JIRA ticket:
>>>>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
>>>>>>>> 2. Functional Specs:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStac
>>>>>>>>k+I
>>>>>>>>de
>>>>>>>>n
>>>>>>>>ti
>>>>>>>> ty
>>>>>>>> +and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed this
>>>>>>>>feature
>>>>>>>> back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our 
>>>>>>>>implementation.
>>>>>>>> 3. Unit tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>> services/iam/server/test
>>>>>>>> (for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam plugin).
>>>>>>>> 4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>> test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
>>>>>>>> 5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit  
>>>>>>>>63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
>>>>>>>> 6. RAT test has been passed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>

Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Posted by Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com>.

It is already in 4.4 as well.

Kelven

On 3/14/14, 3:58 PM, "Marcus" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:

>That is, I'll pull the current 4.4 into my branch and test before I merge
>it in
>
>
>On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Marcus <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Can we get the fix in 4.4? I'd rather sync that then master, since it
>> has been cut already.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 4:00 PM, Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com>
>>wrote:
>>> Marcus,
>>>
>>> I¹ve pushed the fix to master already. You probably need to sync your
>>> local branch with master
>>>
>>> Kelven
>>>
>>> On 3/14/14, 11:08 AM, "Marcus" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>It's in branch resize-root
>>>>
>>>>On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>> Marcus,
>>>>>
>>>>>         What is the latest commit you have picked up on your local
>>>>>setup from
>>>>> master? Our QA reports similar issues caused by recent VMSync bug
>>>>>fix,
>>>>> just want to make sure that your local code has that fix.
>>>>>
>>>>>         Thanks
>>>>>         -min
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/14/14 9:37 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Before merge, I did a sanity zone and VM deployment test, and worked
>>>>>>fine
>>>>>>on my setup after fixing the issues introduced by Antonio's commit. I
>>>>>>can
>>>>>>verify this again today. From the symptom, it seems not related to
>>>>>>IAM
>>>>>>change.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Thanks
>>>>>>-min
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>On 3/14/14 1:07 AM, "Marcus" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>creating a new router does the same...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>2014-03-14 02:06:41,446 DEBUG [vm.dao.VMInstanceDaoImpl]
>>>>>>>(Work-Job-Executor-5:Job-41/Job-42 ctx-91928df8) Unable to update
>>>>>>>VM[DomainRouter|r-5-VM]: DB Data={Host=1; State=Running; updated=3;
>>>>>>>time=Fri Mar 14 02:06:11 MDT 2014} New Data: {Host=1; State=Running;
>>>>>>>updated=3; time=Fri Mar 14 02:06:11 MDT 2014} Stale Data: {Host=1;
>>>>>>>State=Starting; updated=2; time=Fri Mar 14 02:05:52 MDT 2014}
>>>>>>>2014-03-14 02:06:41,448 ERROR [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl]
>>>>>>>(Work-Job-Executor-5:Job-41/Job-42 ctx-91928df8) Failed to start
>>>>>>>instance VM[DomainRouter|r-5-VM]
>>>>>>>com.cloud.exception.ConcurrentOperationException: Unable to
>>>>>>>transition
>>>>>>>to a new state.
>>>>>>>at
>>>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachi
>>>>>>>neM
>>>>>>>an
>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>gerImpl.java:1029)
>>>>>>>at
>>>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.advanceStart(VirtualMachineMa
>>>>>>>nag
>>>>>>>er
>>>>>>>I
>>>>>>>mpl.java:775)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 2:03 AM, Marcus <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I have no idea if its related to this branch merge or not, but I'm
>>>>>>>> unable to start the ssvm on master since I pulled about an hour
>>>>>>>>ago.
>>>>>>>>I
>>>>>>>> can deploy a fresh zone, and the ssvm will actually start, but it
>>>>>>>> can't transition state in the DB, so it kills the vm.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2014-03-14 01:57:46,356 DEBUG [vm.dao.VMInstanceDaoImpl]
>>>>>>>> (Work-Job-Executor-1:Job-33/Job-34 ctx-5fc7b113) Unable to update
>>>>>>>> VM[SecondaryStorageVm|s-1-VM]: DB Data={Host=1; State=Running;
>>>>>>>> updated=19; time=Fri Mar 14 01:57:11 MDT 2014} New Data: {Host=1;
>>>>>>>> State=Running; updated=19; time=Fri Mar 14 01:57:11 MDT 2014}
>>>>>>>>Stale
>>>>>>>> Data: {Host=1; State=Starting; updated=18; time=Fri Mar 14
>>>>>>>>01:56:38
>>>>>>>> MDT 2014}
>>>>>>>> 2014-03-14 01:57:46,359 ERROR [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl]
>>>>>>>> (Work-Job-Executor-1:Job-33/Job-34 ctx-5fc7b113) Failed to start
>>>>>>>> instance VM[SecondaryStorageVm|s-1-VM]
>>>>>>>> com.cloud.exception.ConcurrentOperationException: Unable to
>>>>>>>>transition
>>>>>>>> to a new state.
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMach
>>>>>>>>ine
>>>>>>>>Ma
>>>>>>>>n
>>>>>>>>agerImpl.java:1029)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMach
>>>>>>>>ine
>>>>>>>>Ma
>>>>>>>>n
>>>>>>>>agerImpl.java:5129)
>>>>>>>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImp
>>>>>>>>l.j
>>>>>>>>av
>>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>>:57)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAcc
>>>>>>>>ess
>>>>>>>>or
>>>>>>>>I
>>>>>>>>mpl.java:43)
>>>>>>>> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobHandlerProxy.handleVmWorkJob(VmWorkJobHandler
>>>>>>>>Pro
>>>>>>>>xy
>>>>>>>>.
>>>>>>>>java:107)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.handleVmWorkJob(VirtualMachi
>>>>>>>>neM
>>>>>>>>an
>>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>>gerImpl.java:5274)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobDispatcher.runJob(VmWorkJobDispatcher.java:10
>>>>>>>>2)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.run
>>>>>>>>InC
>>>>>>>>on
>>>>>>>>t
>>>>>>>>ext(AsyncJobManagerImpl.java:491)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable$1.run(
>>>>>>>>Man
>>>>>>>>ag
>>>>>>>>e
>>>>>>>>dContextRunnable.java:49)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext$1.
>>>>>>>>cal
>>>>>>>>l(
>>>>>>>>D
>>>>>>>>efaultManagedContext.java:56)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.ca
>>>>>>>>llW
>>>>>>>>it
>>>>>>>>h
>>>>>>>>Context(DefaultManagedContext.java:103)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.ru
>>>>>>>>nWi
>>>>>>>>th
>>>>>>>>C
>>>>>>>>ontext(DefaultManagedContext.java:53)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable.run(Ma
>>>>>>>>nag
>>>>>>>>ed
>>>>>>>>C
>>>>>>>>ontextRunnable.java:46)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.run
>>>>>>>>(As
>>>>>>>>yn
>>>>>>>>c
>>>>>>>>JobManagerImpl.java:448)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:
>>>>>>>>471
>>>>>>>>)
>>>>>>>> at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:262)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecuto
>>>>>>>>r.j
>>>>>>>>av
>>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>>:1145)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecut
>>>>>>>>or.
>>>>>>>>ja
>>>>>>>>v
>>>>>>>>a:615)
>>>>>>>> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:744)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 11:30 PM, Marcus <sh...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Min, in looking at this branch merge, I need to be reminded
>>>>>>>>>whether
>>>>>>>>>we
>>>>>>>>> are supposed to squash feature branches when they come in, or
>>>>>>>>>preserve
>>>>>>>>> history. It's nice to preserve history, but it's a lot easier to
>>>>>>>>>undo
>>>>>>>>> a squashed merge.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> IAM branch is now merged to master.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 3/13/14 10:13 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Since we haven't heard of any objections to this merge for 3
>>>>>>>>>>>days,
>>>>>>>>>>>I
>>>>>>>>>>>am
>>>>>>>>>>>going to merge it to master today.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Thanks
>>>>>>>>>>>-min
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>On 3/11/14 12:23 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>On 11 mrt. 2014, at 19:52, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also, have already run FingBugs on our branch and addressed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>new
>>>>>>>>>>>>> findings introduced by our branch.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>Awesome! :-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/10/14 7:33 PM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No new jar dependencies.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any new jar dependencies?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Access
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Development
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this effort has been done by Prachi and me on ACS rbac
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>branch
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>(https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=sh
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>t
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>log;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>h
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=r
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ef
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> s/heads/rbac).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Checklists for the merge:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. JIRA ticket:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Functional Specs:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Clou
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>dSt
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>ac
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>k
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>+Ide
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>n
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>ti
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ty
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>feature
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>implementation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Unit tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> services/iam/server/test
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>plugin).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>at:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 6. RAT test has been passed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>

Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Posted by Marcus <sh...@gmail.com>.

That is, I'll pull the current 4.4 into my branch and test before I merge it in


On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Marcus <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Can we get the fix in 4.4? I'd rather sync that then master, since it
> has been cut already.
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 4:00 PM, Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com> wrote:
>> Marcus,
>>
>> I¹ve pushed the fix to master already. You probably need to sync your
>> local branch with master
>>
>> Kelven
>>
>> On 3/14/14, 11:08 AM, "Marcus" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>It's in branch resize-root
>>>
>>>On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>> Marcus,
>>>>
>>>>         What is the latest commit you have picked up on your local
>>>>setup from
>>>> master? Our QA reports similar issues caused by recent VMSync bug fix,
>>>> just want to make sure that your local code has that fix.
>>>>
>>>>         Thanks
>>>>         -min
>>>>
>>>> On 3/14/14 9:37 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Before merge, I did a sanity zone and VM deployment test, and worked
>>>>>fine
>>>>>on my setup after fixing the issues introduced by Antonio's commit. I
>>>>>can
>>>>>verify this again today. From the symptom, it seems not related to IAM
>>>>>change.
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks
>>>>>-min
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>On 3/14/14 1:07 AM, "Marcus" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>creating a new router does the same...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>2014-03-14 02:06:41,446 DEBUG [vm.dao.VMInstanceDaoImpl]
>>>>>>(Work-Job-Executor-5:Job-41/Job-42 ctx-91928df8) Unable to update
>>>>>>VM[DomainRouter|r-5-VM]: DB Data={Host=1; State=Running; updated=3;
>>>>>>time=Fri Mar 14 02:06:11 MDT 2014} New Data: {Host=1; State=Running;
>>>>>>updated=3; time=Fri Mar 14 02:06:11 MDT 2014} Stale Data: {Host=1;
>>>>>>State=Starting; updated=2; time=Fri Mar 14 02:05:52 MDT 2014}
>>>>>>2014-03-14 02:06:41,448 ERROR [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl]
>>>>>>(Work-Job-Executor-5:Job-41/Job-42 ctx-91928df8) Failed to start
>>>>>>instance VM[DomainRouter|r-5-VM]
>>>>>>com.cloud.exception.ConcurrentOperationException: Unable to transition
>>>>>>to a new state.
>>>>>>at
>>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineM
>>>>>>an
>>>>>>a
>>>>>>gerImpl.java:1029)
>>>>>>at
>>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.advanceStart(VirtualMachineManag
>>>>>>er
>>>>>>I
>>>>>>mpl.java:775)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 2:03 AM, Marcus <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> I have no idea if its related to this branch merge or not, but I'm
>>>>>>> unable to start the ssvm on master since I pulled about an hour ago.
>>>>>>>I
>>>>>>> can deploy a fresh zone, and the ssvm will actually start, but it
>>>>>>> can't transition state in the DB, so it kills the vm.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2014-03-14 01:57:46,356 DEBUG [vm.dao.VMInstanceDaoImpl]
>>>>>>> (Work-Job-Executor-1:Job-33/Job-34 ctx-5fc7b113) Unable to update
>>>>>>> VM[SecondaryStorageVm|s-1-VM]: DB Data={Host=1; State=Running;
>>>>>>> updated=19; time=Fri Mar 14 01:57:11 MDT 2014} New Data: {Host=1;
>>>>>>> State=Running; updated=19; time=Fri Mar 14 01:57:11 MDT 2014} Stale
>>>>>>> Data: {Host=1; State=Starting; updated=18; time=Fri Mar 14 01:56:38
>>>>>>> MDT 2014}
>>>>>>> 2014-03-14 01:57:46,359 ERROR [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl]
>>>>>>> (Work-Job-Executor-1:Job-33/Job-34 ctx-5fc7b113) Failed to start
>>>>>>> instance VM[SecondaryStorageVm|s-1-VM]
>>>>>>> com.cloud.exception.ConcurrentOperationException: Unable to
>>>>>>>transition
>>>>>>> to a new state.
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachine
>>>>>>>Ma
>>>>>>>n
>>>>>>>agerImpl.java:1029)
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachine
>>>>>>>Ma
>>>>>>>n
>>>>>>>agerImpl.java:5129)
>>>>>>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.j
>>>>>>>av
>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>:57)
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccess
>>>>>>>or
>>>>>>>I
>>>>>>>mpl.java:43)
>>>>>>> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobHandlerProxy.handleVmWorkJob(VmWorkJobHandlerPro
>>>>>>>xy
>>>>>>>.
>>>>>>>java:107)
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.handleVmWorkJob(VirtualMachineM
>>>>>>>an
>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>gerImpl.java:5274)
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobDispatcher.runJob(VmWorkJobDispatcher.java:102)
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.runInC
>>>>>>>on
>>>>>>>t
>>>>>>>ext(AsyncJobManagerImpl.java:491)
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable$1.run(Man
>>>>>>>ag
>>>>>>>e
>>>>>>>dContextRunnable.java:49)
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext$1.cal
>>>>>>>l(
>>>>>>>D
>>>>>>>efaultManagedContext.java:56)
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.callW
>>>>>>>it
>>>>>>>h
>>>>>>>Context(DefaultManagedContext.java:103)
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.runWi
>>>>>>>th
>>>>>>>C
>>>>>>>ontext(DefaultManagedContext.java:53)
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable.run(Manag
>>>>>>>ed
>>>>>>>C
>>>>>>>ontextRunnable.java:46)
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.run(As
>>>>>>>yn
>>>>>>>c
>>>>>>>JobManagerImpl.java:448)
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:471
>>>>>>>)
>>>>>>> at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:262)
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.j
>>>>>>>av
>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>:1145)
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.
>>>>>>>ja
>>>>>>>v
>>>>>>>a:615)
>>>>>>> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:744)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 11:30 PM, Marcus <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Min, in looking at this branch merge, I need to be reminded whether
>>>>>>>>we
>>>>>>>> are supposed to squash feature branches when they come in, or
>>>>>>>>preserve
>>>>>>>> history. It's nice to preserve history, but it's a lot easier to
>>>>>>>>undo
>>>>>>>> a squashed merge.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>> IAM branch is now merged to master.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 3/13/14 10:13 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Since we haven't heard of any objections to this merge for 3 days,
>>>>>>>>>>I
>>>>>>>>>>am
>>>>>>>>>>going to merge it to master today.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Thanks
>>>>>>>>>>-min
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>On 3/11/14 12:23 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>On 11 mrt. 2014, at 19:52, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Also, have already run FingBugs on our branch and addressed all
>>>>>>>>>>>>new
>>>>>>>>>>>> findings introduced by our branch.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Awesome! :-)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/10/14 7:33 PM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> No new jar dependencies.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any new jar dependencies?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Access
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Development
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this effort has been done by Prachi and me on ACS rbac branch
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>(https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=sh
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>t
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>log;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>h
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=r
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ef
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> s/heads/rbac).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Checklists for the merge:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. JIRA ticket:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Functional Specs:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudSt
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>ac
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>k
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>+Ide
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>n
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>ti
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ty
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>feature
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>implementation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Unit tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> services/iam/server/test
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>plugin).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 6. RAT test has been passed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>

Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Posted by Marcus <sh...@gmail.com>.

Can we get the fix in 4.4? I'd rather sync that then master, since it
has been cut already.


On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 4:00 PM, Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com> wrote:
> Marcus,
>
> I¹ve pushed the fix to master already. You probably need to sync your
> local branch with master
>
> Kelven
>
> On 3/14/14, 11:08 AM, "Marcus" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>It's in branch resize-root
>>
>>On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>> Marcus,
>>>
>>>         What is the latest commit you have picked up on your local
>>>setup from
>>> master? Our QA reports similar issues caused by recent VMSync bug fix,
>>> just want to make sure that your local code has that fix.
>>>
>>>         Thanks
>>>         -min
>>>
>>> On 3/14/14 9:37 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Before merge, I did a sanity zone and VM deployment test, and worked
>>>>fine
>>>>on my setup after fixing the issues introduced by Antonio's commit. I
>>>>can
>>>>verify this again today. From the symptom, it seems not related to IAM
>>>>change.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks
>>>>-min
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>On 3/14/14 1:07 AM, "Marcus" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>creating a new router does the same...
>>>>>
>>>>>2014-03-14 02:06:41,446 DEBUG [vm.dao.VMInstanceDaoImpl]
>>>>>(Work-Job-Executor-5:Job-41/Job-42 ctx-91928df8) Unable to update
>>>>>VM[DomainRouter|r-5-VM]: DB Data={Host=1; State=Running; updated=3;
>>>>>time=Fri Mar 14 02:06:11 MDT 2014} New Data: {Host=1; State=Running;
>>>>>updated=3; time=Fri Mar 14 02:06:11 MDT 2014} Stale Data: {Host=1;
>>>>>State=Starting; updated=2; time=Fri Mar 14 02:05:52 MDT 2014}
>>>>>2014-03-14 02:06:41,448 ERROR [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl]
>>>>>(Work-Job-Executor-5:Job-41/Job-42 ctx-91928df8) Failed to start
>>>>>instance VM[DomainRouter|r-5-VM]
>>>>>com.cloud.exception.ConcurrentOperationException: Unable to transition
>>>>>to a new state.
>>>>>at
>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineM
>>>>>an
>>>>>a
>>>>>gerImpl.java:1029)
>>>>>at
>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.advanceStart(VirtualMachineManag
>>>>>er
>>>>>I
>>>>>mpl.java:775)
>>>>>
>>>>>On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 2:03 AM, Marcus <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> I have no idea if its related to this branch merge or not, but I'm
>>>>>> unable to start the ssvm on master since I pulled about an hour ago.
>>>>>>I
>>>>>> can deploy a fresh zone, and the ssvm will actually start, but it
>>>>>> can't transition state in the DB, so it kills the vm.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2014-03-14 01:57:46,356 DEBUG [vm.dao.VMInstanceDaoImpl]
>>>>>> (Work-Job-Executor-1:Job-33/Job-34 ctx-5fc7b113) Unable to update
>>>>>> VM[SecondaryStorageVm|s-1-VM]: DB Data={Host=1; State=Running;
>>>>>> updated=19; time=Fri Mar 14 01:57:11 MDT 2014} New Data: {Host=1;
>>>>>> State=Running; updated=19; time=Fri Mar 14 01:57:11 MDT 2014} Stale
>>>>>> Data: {Host=1; State=Starting; updated=18; time=Fri Mar 14 01:56:38
>>>>>> MDT 2014}
>>>>>> 2014-03-14 01:57:46,359 ERROR [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl]
>>>>>> (Work-Job-Executor-1:Job-33/Job-34 ctx-5fc7b113) Failed to start
>>>>>> instance VM[SecondaryStorageVm|s-1-VM]
>>>>>> com.cloud.exception.ConcurrentOperationException: Unable to
>>>>>>transition
>>>>>> to a new state.
>>>>>> at
>>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachine
>>>>>>Ma
>>>>>>n
>>>>>>agerImpl.java:1029)
>>>>>> at
>>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachine
>>>>>>Ma
>>>>>>n
>>>>>>agerImpl.java:5129)
>>>>>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
>>>>>> at
>>>>>>sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.j
>>>>>>av
>>>>>>a
>>>>>>:57)
>>>>>> at
>>>>>>sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccess
>>>>>>or
>>>>>>I
>>>>>>mpl.java:43)
>>>>>> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
>>>>>> at
>>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobHandlerProxy.handleVmWorkJob(VmWorkJobHandlerPro
>>>>>>xy
>>>>>>.
>>>>>>java:107)
>>>>>> at
>>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.handleVmWorkJob(VirtualMachineM
>>>>>>an
>>>>>>a
>>>>>>gerImpl.java:5274)
>>>>>> at
>>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobDispatcher.runJob(VmWorkJobDispatcher.java:102)
>>>>>> at
>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.runInC
>>>>>>on
>>>>>>t
>>>>>>ext(AsyncJobManagerImpl.java:491)
>>>>>> at
>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable$1.run(Man
>>>>>>ag
>>>>>>e
>>>>>>dContextRunnable.java:49)
>>>>>> at
>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext$1.cal
>>>>>>l(
>>>>>>D
>>>>>>efaultManagedContext.java:56)
>>>>>> at
>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.callW
>>>>>>it
>>>>>>h
>>>>>>Context(DefaultManagedContext.java:103)
>>>>>> at
>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.runWi
>>>>>>th
>>>>>>C
>>>>>>ontext(DefaultManagedContext.java:53)
>>>>>> at
>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable.run(Manag
>>>>>>ed
>>>>>>C
>>>>>>ontextRunnable.java:46)
>>>>>> at
>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.run(As
>>>>>>yn
>>>>>>c
>>>>>>JobManagerImpl.java:448)
>>>>>> at
>>>>>>java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:471
>>>>>>)
>>>>>> at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:262)
>>>>>> at
>>>>>>java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.j
>>>>>>av
>>>>>>a
>>>>>>:1145)
>>>>>> at
>>>>>>java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.
>>>>>>ja
>>>>>>v
>>>>>>a:615)
>>>>>> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:744)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 11:30 PM, Marcus <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Min, in looking at this branch merge, I need to be reminded whether
>>>>>>>we
>>>>>>> are supposed to squash feature branches when they come in, or
>>>>>>>preserve
>>>>>>> history. It's nice to preserve history, but it's a lot easier to
>>>>>>>undo
>>>>>>> a squashed merge.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>> IAM branch is now merged to master.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 3/13/14 10:13 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Since we haven't heard of any objections to this merge for 3 days,
>>>>>>>>>I
>>>>>>>>>am
>>>>>>>>>going to merge it to master today.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Thanks
>>>>>>>>>-min
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>On 3/11/14 12:23 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>On 11 mrt. 2014, at 19:52, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Also, have already run FingBugs on our branch and addressed all
>>>>>>>>>>>new
>>>>>>>>>>> findings introduced by our branch.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Awesome! :-)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/10/14 7:33 PM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> No new jar dependencies.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any new jar dependencies?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Access
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Development
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this effort has been done by Prachi and me on ACS rbac branch
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>(https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=sh
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>t
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>log;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>h
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=r
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ef
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> s/heads/rbac).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Checklists for the merge:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. JIRA ticket:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Functional Specs:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudSt
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>ac
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>k
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>+Ide
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>n
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>ti
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ty
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>feature
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>implementation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Unit tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> services/iam/server/test
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>plugin).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 6. RAT test has been passed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>

Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Posted by Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com>.

Marcus,

I¹ve pushed the fix to master already. You probably need to sync your
local branch with master

Kelven

On 3/14/14, 11:08 AM, "Marcus" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:

>It's in branch resize-root
>
>On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>> Marcus,
>>
>>         What is the latest commit you have picked up on your local
>>setup from
>> master? Our QA reports similar issues caused by recent VMSync bug fix,
>> just want to make sure that your local code has that fix.
>>
>>         Thanks
>>         -min
>>
>> On 3/14/14 9:37 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Before merge, I did a sanity zone and VM deployment test, and worked
>>>fine
>>>on my setup after fixing the issues introduced by Antonio's commit. I
>>>can
>>>verify this again today. From the symptom, it seems not related to IAM
>>>change.
>>>
>>>Thanks
>>>-min
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>On 3/14/14 1:07 AM, "Marcus" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>creating a new router does the same...
>>>>
>>>>2014-03-14 02:06:41,446 DEBUG [vm.dao.VMInstanceDaoImpl]
>>>>(Work-Job-Executor-5:Job-41/Job-42 ctx-91928df8) Unable to update
>>>>VM[DomainRouter|r-5-VM]: DB Data={Host=1; State=Running; updated=3;
>>>>time=Fri Mar 14 02:06:11 MDT 2014} New Data: {Host=1; State=Running;
>>>>updated=3; time=Fri Mar 14 02:06:11 MDT 2014} Stale Data: {Host=1;
>>>>State=Starting; updated=2; time=Fri Mar 14 02:05:52 MDT 2014}
>>>>2014-03-14 02:06:41,448 ERROR [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl]
>>>>(Work-Job-Executor-5:Job-41/Job-42 ctx-91928df8) Failed to start
>>>>instance VM[DomainRouter|r-5-VM]
>>>>com.cloud.exception.ConcurrentOperationException: Unable to transition
>>>>to a new state.
>>>>at
>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineM
>>>>an
>>>>a
>>>>gerImpl.java:1029)
>>>>at
>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.advanceStart(VirtualMachineManag
>>>>er
>>>>I
>>>>mpl.java:775)
>>>>
>>>>On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 2:03 AM, Marcus <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> I have no idea if its related to this branch merge or not, but I'm
>>>>> unable to start the ssvm on master since I pulled about an hour ago.
>>>>>I
>>>>> can deploy a fresh zone, and the ssvm will actually start, but it
>>>>> can't transition state in the DB, so it kills the vm.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2014-03-14 01:57:46,356 DEBUG [vm.dao.VMInstanceDaoImpl]
>>>>> (Work-Job-Executor-1:Job-33/Job-34 ctx-5fc7b113) Unable to update
>>>>> VM[SecondaryStorageVm|s-1-VM]: DB Data={Host=1; State=Running;
>>>>> updated=19; time=Fri Mar 14 01:57:11 MDT 2014} New Data: {Host=1;
>>>>> State=Running; updated=19; time=Fri Mar 14 01:57:11 MDT 2014} Stale
>>>>> Data: {Host=1; State=Starting; updated=18; time=Fri Mar 14 01:56:38
>>>>> MDT 2014}
>>>>> 2014-03-14 01:57:46,359 ERROR [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl]
>>>>> (Work-Job-Executor-1:Job-33/Job-34 ctx-5fc7b113) Failed to start
>>>>> instance VM[SecondaryStorageVm|s-1-VM]
>>>>> com.cloud.exception.ConcurrentOperationException: Unable to
>>>>>transition
>>>>> to a new state.
>>>>> at
>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachine
>>>>>Ma
>>>>>n
>>>>>agerImpl.java:1029)
>>>>> at
>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachine
>>>>>Ma
>>>>>n
>>>>>agerImpl.java:5129)
>>>>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
>>>>> at
>>>>>sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.j
>>>>>av
>>>>>a
>>>>>:57)
>>>>> at
>>>>>sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccess
>>>>>or
>>>>>I
>>>>>mpl.java:43)
>>>>> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
>>>>> at
>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobHandlerProxy.handleVmWorkJob(VmWorkJobHandlerPro
>>>>>xy
>>>>>.
>>>>>java:107)
>>>>> at
>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.handleVmWorkJob(VirtualMachineM
>>>>>an
>>>>>a
>>>>>gerImpl.java:5274)
>>>>> at
>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobDispatcher.runJob(VmWorkJobDispatcher.java:102)
>>>>> at
>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.runInC
>>>>>on
>>>>>t
>>>>>ext(AsyncJobManagerImpl.java:491)
>>>>> at
>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable$1.run(Man
>>>>>ag
>>>>>e
>>>>>dContextRunnable.java:49)
>>>>> at
>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext$1.cal
>>>>>l(
>>>>>D
>>>>>efaultManagedContext.java:56)
>>>>> at
>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.callW
>>>>>it
>>>>>h
>>>>>Context(DefaultManagedContext.java:103)
>>>>> at
>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.runWi
>>>>>th
>>>>>C
>>>>>ontext(DefaultManagedContext.java:53)
>>>>> at
>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable.run(Manag
>>>>>ed
>>>>>C
>>>>>ontextRunnable.java:46)
>>>>> at
>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.run(As
>>>>>yn
>>>>>c
>>>>>JobManagerImpl.java:448)
>>>>> at
>>>>>java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:471
>>>>>)
>>>>> at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:262)
>>>>> at
>>>>>java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.j
>>>>>av
>>>>>a
>>>>>:1145)
>>>>> at
>>>>>java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.
>>>>>ja
>>>>>v
>>>>>a:615)
>>>>> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:744)
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 11:30 PM, Marcus <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Min, in looking at this branch merge, I need to be reminded whether
>>>>>>we
>>>>>> are supposed to squash feature branches when they come in, or
>>>>>>preserve
>>>>>> history. It's nice to preserve history, but it's a lot easier to
>>>>>>undo
>>>>>> a squashed merge.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>> IAM branch is now merged to master.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 3/13/14 10:13 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Since we haven't heard of any objections to this merge for 3 days,
>>>>>>>>I
>>>>>>>>am
>>>>>>>>going to merge it to master today.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Thanks
>>>>>>>>-min
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On 3/11/14 12:23 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>On 11 mrt. 2014, at 19:52, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Also, have already run FingBugs on our branch and addressed all
>>>>>>>>>>new
>>>>>>>>>> findings introduced by our branch.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Awesome! :-)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 3/10/14 7:33 PM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> No new jar dependencies.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>>>>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Any new jar dependencies?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Access
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Development
>>>>>>>>>>>>>for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> this effort has been done by Prachi and me on ACS rbac branch
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>(https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=sh
>>>>>>>>>>>>>or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>t
>>>>>>>>>>>>>log;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>h
>>>>>>>>>>>>>=r
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ef
>>>>>>>>>>>>> s/heads/rbac).
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Checklists for the merge:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. JIRA ticket:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Functional Specs:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudSt
>>>>>>>>>>>>>ac
>>>>>>>>>>>>>k
>>>>>>>>>>>>>+Ide
>>>>>>>>>>>>>n
>>>>>>>>>>>>>ti
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ty
>>>>>>>>>>>>> +and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>feature
>>>>>>>>>>>>> back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our
>>>>>>>>>>>>>implementation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Unit tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> services/iam/server/test
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam
>>>>>>>>>>>>>plugin).
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 6. RAT test has been passed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>
>>

Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Posted by Marcus <sh...@gmail.com>.

It's in branch resize-root

On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
> Marcus,
>
>         What is the latest commit you have picked up on your local setup from
> master? Our QA reports similar issues caused by recent VMSync bug fix,
> just want to make sure that your local code has that fix.
>
>         Thanks
>         -min
>
> On 3/14/14 9:37 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>>Before merge, I did a sanity zone and VM deployment test, and worked fine
>>on my setup after fixing the issues introduced by Antonio's commit. I can
>>verify this again today. From the symptom, it seems not related to IAM
>>change.
>>
>>Thanks
>>-min
>>
>>
>>
>>On 3/14/14 1:07 AM, "Marcus" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>creating a new router does the same...
>>>
>>>2014-03-14 02:06:41,446 DEBUG [vm.dao.VMInstanceDaoImpl]
>>>(Work-Job-Executor-5:Job-41/Job-42 ctx-91928df8) Unable to update
>>>VM[DomainRouter|r-5-VM]: DB Data={Host=1; State=Running; updated=3;
>>>time=Fri Mar 14 02:06:11 MDT 2014} New Data: {Host=1; State=Running;
>>>updated=3; time=Fri Mar 14 02:06:11 MDT 2014} Stale Data: {Host=1;
>>>State=Starting; updated=2; time=Fri Mar 14 02:05:52 MDT 2014}
>>>2014-03-14 02:06:41,448 ERROR [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl]
>>>(Work-Job-Executor-5:Job-41/Job-42 ctx-91928df8) Failed to start
>>>instance VM[DomainRouter|r-5-VM]
>>>com.cloud.exception.ConcurrentOperationException: Unable to transition
>>>to a new state.
>>>at
>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineMan
>>>a
>>>gerImpl.java:1029)
>>>at
>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.advanceStart(VirtualMachineManager
>>>I
>>>mpl.java:775)
>>>
>>>On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 2:03 AM, Marcus <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I have no idea if its related to this branch merge or not, but I'm
>>>> unable to start the ssvm on master since I pulled about an hour ago. I
>>>> can deploy a fresh zone, and the ssvm will actually start, but it
>>>> can't transition state in the DB, so it kills the vm.
>>>>
>>>> 2014-03-14 01:57:46,356 DEBUG [vm.dao.VMInstanceDaoImpl]
>>>> (Work-Job-Executor-1:Job-33/Job-34 ctx-5fc7b113) Unable to update
>>>> VM[SecondaryStorageVm|s-1-VM]: DB Data={Host=1; State=Running;
>>>> updated=19; time=Fri Mar 14 01:57:11 MDT 2014} New Data: {Host=1;
>>>> State=Running; updated=19; time=Fri Mar 14 01:57:11 MDT 2014} Stale
>>>> Data: {Host=1; State=Starting; updated=18; time=Fri Mar 14 01:56:38
>>>> MDT 2014}
>>>> 2014-03-14 01:57:46,359 ERROR [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl]
>>>> (Work-Job-Executor-1:Job-33/Job-34 ctx-5fc7b113) Failed to start
>>>> instance VM[SecondaryStorageVm|s-1-VM]
>>>> com.cloud.exception.ConcurrentOperationException: Unable to transition
>>>> to a new state.
>>>> at
>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineMa
>>>>n
>>>>agerImpl.java:1029)
>>>> at
>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineMa
>>>>n
>>>>agerImpl.java:5129)
>>>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
>>>> at
>>>>sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.jav
>>>>a
>>>>:57)
>>>> at
>>>>sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessor
>>>>I
>>>>mpl.java:43)
>>>> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
>>>> at
>>>>com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobHandlerProxy.handleVmWorkJob(VmWorkJobHandlerProxy
>>>>.
>>>>java:107)
>>>> at
>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.handleVmWorkJob(VirtualMachineMan
>>>>a
>>>>gerImpl.java:5274)
>>>> at
>>>>com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobDispatcher.runJob(VmWorkJobDispatcher.java:102)
>>>> at
>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.runInCon
>>>>t
>>>>ext(AsyncJobManagerImpl.java:491)
>>>> at
>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable$1.run(Manag
>>>>e
>>>>dContextRunnable.java:49)
>>>> at
>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext$1.call(
>>>>D
>>>>efaultManagedContext.java:56)
>>>> at
>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.callWit
>>>>h
>>>>Context(DefaultManagedContext.java:103)
>>>> at
>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.runWith
>>>>C
>>>>ontext(DefaultManagedContext.java:53)
>>>> at
>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable.run(Managed
>>>>C
>>>>ontextRunnable.java:46)
>>>> at
>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.run(Asyn
>>>>c
>>>>JobManagerImpl.java:448)
>>>> at
>>>>java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:471)
>>>> at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:262)
>>>> at
>>>>java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.jav
>>>>a
>>>>:1145)
>>>> at
>>>>java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.ja
>>>>v
>>>>a:615)
>>>> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:744)
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 11:30 PM, Marcus <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Min, in looking at this branch merge, I need to be reminded whether we
>>>>> are supposed to squash feature branches when they come in, or preserve
>>>>> history. It's nice to preserve history, but it's a lot easier to undo
>>>>> a squashed merge.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>> IAM branch is now merged to master.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/13/14 10:13 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Since we haven't heard of any objections to this merge for 3 days, I
>>>>>>>am
>>>>>>>going to merge it to master today.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Thanks
>>>>>>>-min
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On 3/11/14 12:23 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On 11 mrt. 2014, at 19:52, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Also, have already run FingBugs on our branch and addressed all
>>>>>>>>>new
>>>>>>>>> findings introduced by our branch.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Awesome! :-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 3/10/14 7:33 PM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> No new jar dependencies.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>>>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Any new jar dependencies?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and Access
>>>>>>>>>>>> Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch.
>>>>>>>>>>>>Development
>>>>>>>>>>>>for
>>>>>>>>>>>> this effort has been done by Prachi and me on ACS rbac branch
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>(https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shor
>>>>>>>>>>>>t
>>>>>>>>>>>>log;
>>>>>>>>>>>>h
>>>>>>>>>>>>=r
>>>>>>>>>>>> ef
>>>>>>>>>>>> s/heads/rbac).
>>>>>>>>>>>> Checklists for the merge:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. JIRA ticket:
>>>>>>>>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Functional Specs:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStac
>>>>>>>>>>>>k
>>>>>>>>>>>>+Ide
>>>>>>>>>>>>n
>>>>>>>>>>>>ti
>>>>>>>>>>>> ty
>>>>>>>>>>>> +and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed this
>>>>>>>>>>>>feature
>>>>>>>>>>>> back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our
>>>>>>>>>>>>implementation.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Unit tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>>>>>> services/iam/server/test
>>>>>>>>>>>> (for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam plugin).
>>>>>>>>>>>> 4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>>>>>> test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit
>>>>>>>>>>>> 63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 6. RAT test has been passed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>

Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Posted by Marcus <sh...@gmail.com>.

Ok, thanks.

On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com> wrote:
> That¹s my bad. I cherry-picked a fix after IAM¹s merge and this has broken
> it. The problem didn¹t show up in my local run.
>
> I¹m working on a fix of it.
>
> Kelven
>
> On 3/14/14, 9:47 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>>Marcus,
>>
>>       What is the latest commit you have picked up on your local setup from
>>master? Our QA reports similar issues caused by recent VMSync bug fix,
>>just want to make sure that your local code has that fix.
>>
>>       Thanks
>>       -min
>>
>>On 3/14/14 9:37 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Before merge, I did a sanity zone and VM deployment test, and worked fine
>>>on my setup after fixing the issues introduced by Antonio's commit. I can
>>>verify this again today. From the symptom, it seems not related to IAM
>>>change.
>>>
>>>Thanks
>>>-min
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>On 3/14/14 1:07 AM, "Marcus" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>creating a new router does the same...
>>>>
>>>>2014-03-14 02:06:41,446 DEBUG [vm.dao.VMInstanceDaoImpl]
>>>>(Work-Job-Executor-5:Job-41/Job-42 ctx-91928df8) Unable to update
>>>>VM[DomainRouter|r-5-VM]: DB Data={Host=1; State=Running; updated=3;
>>>>time=Fri Mar 14 02:06:11 MDT 2014} New Data: {Host=1; State=Running;
>>>>updated=3; time=Fri Mar 14 02:06:11 MDT 2014} Stale Data: {Host=1;
>>>>State=Starting; updated=2; time=Fri Mar 14 02:05:52 MDT 2014}
>>>>2014-03-14 02:06:41,448 ERROR [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl]
>>>>(Work-Job-Executor-5:Job-41/Job-42 ctx-91928df8) Failed to start
>>>>instance VM[DomainRouter|r-5-VM]
>>>>com.cloud.exception.ConcurrentOperationException: Unable to transition
>>>>to a new state.
>>>>at
>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineMa
>>>>n
>>>>a
>>>>gerImpl.java:1029)
>>>>at
>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.advanceStart(VirtualMachineManage
>>>>r
>>>>I
>>>>mpl.java:775)
>>>>
>>>>On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 2:03 AM, Marcus <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> I have no idea if its related to this branch merge or not, but I'm
>>>>> unable to start the ssvm on master since I pulled about an hour ago. I
>>>>> can deploy a fresh zone, and the ssvm will actually start, but it
>>>>> can't transition state in the DB, so it kills the vm.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2014-03-14 01:57:46,356 DEBUG [vm.dao.VMInstanceDaoImpl]
>>>>> (Work-Job-Executor-1:Job-33/Job-34 ctx-5fc7b113) Unable to update
>>>>> VM[SecondaryStorageVm|s-1-VM]: DB Data={Host=1; State=Running;
>>>>> updated=19; time=Fri Mar 14 01:57:11 MDT 2014} New Data: {Host=1;
>>>>> State=Running; updated=19; time=Fri Mar 14 01:57:11 MDT 2014} Stale
>>>>> Data: {Host=1; State=Starting; updated=18; time=Fri Mar 14 01:56:38
>>>>> MDT 2014}
>>>>> 2014-03-14 01:57:46,359 ERROR [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl]
>>>>> (Work-Job-Executor-1:Job-33/Job-34 ctx-5fc7b113) Failed to start
>>>>> instance VM[SecondaryStorageVm|s-1-VM]
>>>>> com.cloud.exception.ConcurrentOperationException: Unable to transition
>>>>> to a new state.
>>>>> at
>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineM
>>>>>a
>>>>>n
>>>>>agerImpl.java:1029)
>>>>> at
>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineM
>>>>>a
>>>>>n
>>>>>agerImpl.java:5129)
>>>>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
>>>>> at
>>>>>sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.ja
>>>>>v
>>>>>a
>>>>>:57)
>>>>> at
>>>>>sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccesso
>>>>>r
>>>>>I
>>>>>mpl.java:43)
>>>>> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
>>>>> at
>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobHandlerProxy.handleVmWorkJob(VmWorkJobHandlerProx
>>>>>y
>>>>>.
>>>>>java:107)
>>>>> at
>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.handleVmWorkJob(VirtualMachineMa
>>>>>n
>>>>>a
>>>>>gerImpl.java:5274)
>>>>> at
>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobDispatcher.runJob(VmWorkJobDispatcher.java:102)
>>>>> at
>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.runInCo
>>>>>n
>>>>>t
>>>>>ext(AsyncJobManagerImpl.java:491)
>>>>> at
>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable$1.run(Mana
>>>>>g
>>>>>e
>>>>>dContextRunnable.java:49)
>>>>> at
>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext$1.call
>>>>>(
>>>>>D
>>>>>efaultManagedContext.java:56)
>>>>> at
>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.callWi
>>>>>t
>>>>>h
>>>>>Context(DefaultManagedContext.java:103)
>>>>> at
>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.runWit
>>>>>h
>>>>>C
>>>>>ontext(DefaultManagedContext.java:53)
>>>>> at
>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable.run(Manage
>>>>>d
>>>>>C
>>>>>ontextRunnable.java:46)
>>>>> at
>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.run(Asy
>>>>>n
>>>>>c
>>>>>JobManagerImpl.java:448)
>>>>> at
>>>>>java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:471)
>>>>> at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:262)
>>>>> at
>>>>>java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.ja
>>>>>v
>>>>>a
>>>>>:1145)
>>>>> at
>>>>>java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.j
>>>>>a
>>>>>v
>>>>>a:615)
>>>>> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:744)
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 11:30 PM, Marcus <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Min, in looking at this branch merge, I need to be reminded whether
>>>>>>we
>>>>>> are supposed to squash feature branches when they come in, or
>>>>>>preserve
>>>>>> history. It's nice to preserve history, but it's a lot easier to undo
>>>>>> a squashed merge.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>> IAM branch is now merged to master.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 3/13/14 10:13 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Since we haven't heard of any objections to this merge for 3 days, I
>>>>>>>>am
>>>>>>>>going to merge it to master today.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Thanks
>>>>>>>>-min
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On 3/11/14 12:23 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>On 11 mrt. 2014, at 19:52, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Also, have already run FingBugs on our branch and addressed all
>>>>>>>>>>new
>>>>>>>>>> findings introduced by our branch.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Awesome! :-)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 3/10/14 7:33 PM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> No new jar dependencies.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>>>>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Any new jar dependencies?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Access
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Development
>>>>>>>>>>>>>for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> this effort has been done by Prachi and me on ACS rbac branch
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>(https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=sho
>>>>>>>>>>>>>r
>>>>>>>>>>>>>t
>>>>>>>>>>>>>log;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>h
>>>>>>>>>>>>>=r
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ef
>>>>>>>>>>>>> s/heads/rbac).
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Checklists for the merge:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. JIRA ticket:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Functional Specs:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudSta
>>>>>>>>>>>>>c
>>>>>>>>>>>>>k
>>>>>>>>>>>>>+Ide
>>>>>>>>>>>>>n
>>>>>>>>>>>>>ti
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ty
>>>>>>>>>>>>> +and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>feature
>>>>>>>>>>>>> back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our
>>>>>>>>>>>>>implementation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Unit tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> services/iam/server/test
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam
>>>>>>>>>>>>>plugin).
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 6. RAT test has been passed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Posted by Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com>.

That¹s my bad. I cherry-picked a fix after IAM¹s merge and this has broken
it. The problem didn¹t show up in my local run.

I¹m working on a fix of it.

Kelven

On 3/14/14, 9:47 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:

>Marcus,
>
>	What is the latest commit you have picked up on your local setup from
>master? Our QA reports similar issues caused by recent VMSync bug fix,
>just want to make sure that your local code has that fix.
>
>	Thanks
>	-min
>
>On 3/14/14 9:37 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>>Before merge, I did a sanity zone and VM deployment test, and worked fine
>>on my setup after fixing the issues introduced by Antonio's commit. I can
>>verify this again today. From the symptom, it seems not related to IAM
>>change.
>>
>>Thanks
>>-min
>>
>>
>>
>>On 3/14/14 1:07 AM, "Marcus" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>creating a new router does the same...
>>>
>>>2014-03-14 02:06:41,446 DEBUG [vm.dao.VMInstanceDaoImpl]
>>>(Work-Job-Executor-5:Job-41/Job-42 ctx-91928df8) Unable to update
>>>VM[DomainRouter|r-5-VM]: DB Data={Host=1; State=Running; updated=3;
>>>time=Fri Mar 14 02:06:11 MDT 2014} New Data: {Host=1; State=Running;
>>>updated=3; time=Fri Mar 14 02:06:11 MDT 2014} Stale Data: {Host=1;
>>>State=Starting; updated=2; time=Fri Mar 14 02:05:52 MDT 2014}
>>>2014-03-14 02:06:41,448 ERROR [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl]
>>>(Work-Job-Executor-5:Job-41/Job-42 ctx-91928df8) Failed to start
>>>instance VM[DomainRouter|r-5-VM]
>>>com.cloud.exception.ConcurrentOperationException: Unable to transition
>>>to a new state.
>>>at 
>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineMa
>>>n
>>>a
>>>gerImpl.java:1029)
>>>at 
>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.advanceStart(VirtualMachineManage
>>>r
>>>I
>>>mpl.java:775)
>>>
>>>On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 2:03 AM, Marcus <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I have no idea if its related to this branch merge or not, but I'm
>>>> unable to start the ssvm on master since I pulled about an hour ago. I
>>>> can deploy a fresh zone, and the ssvm will actually start, but it
>>>> can't transition state in the DB, so it kills the vm.
>>>>
>>>> 2014-03-14 01:57:46,356 DEBUG [vm.dao.VMInstanceDaoImpl]
>>>> (Work-Job-Executor-1:Job-33/Job-34 ctx-5fc7b113) Unable to update
>>>> VM[SecondaryStorageVm|s-1-VM]: DB Data={Host=1; State=Running;
>>>> updated=19; time=Fri Mar 14 01:57:11 MDT 2014} New Data: {Host=1;
>>>> State=Running; updated=19; time=Fri Mar 14 01:57:11 MDT 2014} Stale
>>>> Data: {Host=1; State=Starting; updated=18; time=Fri Mar 14 01:56:38
>>>> MDT 2014}
>>>> 2014-03-14 01:57:46,359 ERROR [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl]
>>>> (Work-Job-Executor-1:Job-33/Job-34 ctx-5fc7b113) Failed to start
>>>> instance VM[SecondaryStorageVm|s-1-VM]
>>>> com.cloud.exception.ConcurrentOperationException: Unable to transition
>>>> to a new state.
>>>> at 
>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineM
>>>>a
>>>>n
>>>>agerImpl.java:1029)
>>>> at 
>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineM
>>>>a
>>>>n
>>>>agerImpl.java:5129)
>>>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
>>>> at 
>>>>sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.ja
>>>>v
>>>>a
>>>>:57)
>>>> at 
>>>>sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccesso
>>>>r
>>>>I
>>>>mpl.java:43)
>>>> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
>>>> at 
>>>>com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobHandlerProxy.handleVmWorkJob(VmWorkJobHandlerProx
>>>>y
>>>>.
>>>>java:107)
>>>> at 
>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.handleVmWorkJob(VirtualMachineMa
>>>>n
>>>>a
>>>>gerImpl.java:5274)
>>>> at 
>>>>com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobDispatcher.runJob(VmWorkJobDispatcher.java:102)
>>>> at 
>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.runInCo
>>>>n
>>>>t
>>>>ext(AsyncJobManagerImpl.java:491)
>>>> at 
>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable$1.run(Mana
>>>>g
>>>>e
>>>>dContextRunnable.java:49)
>>>> at 
>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext$1.call
>>>>(
>>>>D
>>>>efaultManagedContext.java:56)
>>>> at 
>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.callWi
>>>>t
>>>>h
>>>>Context(DefaultManagedContext.java:103)
>>>> at 
>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.runWit
>>>>h
>>>>C
>>>>ontext(DefaultManagedContext.java:53)
>>>> at 
>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable.run(Manage
>>>>d
>>>>C
>>>>ontextRunnable.java:46)
>>>> at 
>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.run(Asy
>>>>n
>>>>c
>>>>JobManagerImpl.java:448)
>>>> at 
>>>>java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:471)
>>>> at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:262)
>>>> at 
>>>>java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.ja
>>>>v
>>>>a
>>>>:1145)
>>>> at 
>>>>java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.j
>>>>a
>>>>v
>>>>a:615)
>>>> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:744)
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 11:30 PM, Marcus <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Min, in looking at this branch merge, I need to be reminded whether
>>>>>we
>>>>> are supposed to squash feature branches when they come in, or
>>>>>preserve
>>>>> history. It's nice to preserve history, but it's a lot easier to undo
>>>>> a squashed merge.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>> IAM branch is now merged to master.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/13/14 10:13 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Since we haven't heard of any objections to this merge for 3 days, I
>>>>>>>am
>>>>>>>going to merge it to master today.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Thanks
>>>>>>>-min
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On 3/11/14 12:23 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On 11 mrt. 2014, at 19:52, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Also, have already run FingBugs on our branch and addressed all
>>>>>>>>>new
>>>>>>>>> findings introduced by our branch.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Awesome! :-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 3/10/14 7:33 PM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> No new jar dependencies.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>>>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Any new jar dependencies?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and
>>>>>>>>>>>>Access
>>>>>>>>>>>> Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch.
>>>>>>>>>>>>Development
>>>>>>>>>>>>for
>>>>>>>>>>>> this effort has been done by Prachi and me on ACS rbac branch
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>(https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=sho
>>>>>>>>>>>>r
>>>>>>>>>>>>t
>>>>>>>>>>>>log;
>>>>>>>>>>>>h
>>>>>>>>>>>>=r
>>>>>>>>>>>> ef
>>>>>>>>>>>> s/heads/rbac).
>>>>>>>>>>>> Checklists for the merge:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. JIRA ticket:
>>>>>>>>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Functional Specs:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudSta
>>>>>>>>>>>>c
>>>>>>>>>>>>k
>>>>>>>>>>>>+Ide
>>>>>>>>>>>>n
>>>>>>>>>>>>ti
>>>>>>>>>>>> ty
>>>>>>>>>>>> +and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed this
>>>>>>>>>>>>feature
>>>>>>>>>>>> back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our
>>>>>>>>>>>>implementation.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Unit tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>>>>>> services/iam/server/test
>>>>>>>>>>>> (for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam
>>>>>>>>>>>>plugin).
>>>>>>>>>>>> 4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>>>>>> test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit
>>>>>>>>>>>> 63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 6. RAT test has been passed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>

Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Posted by Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com>.

Marcus,

	What is the latest commit you have picked up on your local setup from
master? Our QA reports similar issues caused by recent VMSync bug fix,
just want to make sure that your local code has that fix.

	Thanks
	-min

On 3/14/14 9:37 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:

>Before merge, I did a sanity zone and VM deployment test, and worked fine
>on my setup after fixing the issues introduced by Antonio's commit. I can
>verify this again today. From the symptom, it seems not related to IAM
>change.
>
>Thanks
>-min
>
>
>
>On 3/14/14 1:07 AM, "Marcus" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>creating a new router does the same...
>>
>>2014-03-14 02:06:41,446 DEBUG [vm.dao.VMInstanceDaoImpl]
>>(Work-Job-Executor-5:Job-41/Job-42 ctx-91928df8) Unable to update
>>VM[DomainRouter|r-5-VM]: DB Data={Host=1; State=Running; updated=3;
>>time=Fri Mar 14 02:06:11 MDT 2014} New Data: {Host=1; State=Running;
>>updated=3; time=Fri Mar 14 02:06:11 MDT 2014} Stale Data: {Host=1;
>>State=Starting; updated=2; time=Fri Mar 14 02:05:52 MDT 2014}
>>2014-03-14 02:06:41,448 ERROR [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl]
>>(Work-Job-Executor-5:Job-41/Job-42 ctx-91928df8) Failed to start
>>instance VM[DomainRouter|r-5-VM]
>>com.cloud.exception.ConcurrentOperationException: Unable to transition
>>to a new state.
>>at 
>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineMan
>>a
>>gerImpl.java:1029)
>>at 
>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.advanceStart(VirtualMachineManager
>>I
>>mpl.java:775)
>>
>>On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 2:03 AM, Marcus <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I have no idea if its related to this branch merge or not, but I'm
>>> unable to start the ssvm on master since I pulled about an hour ago. I
>>> can deploy a fresh zone, and the ssvm will actually start, but it
>>> can't transition state in the DB, so it kills the vm.
>>>
>>> 2014-03-14 01:57:46,356 DEBUG [vm.dao.VMInstanceDaoImpl]
>>> (Work-Job-Executor-1:Job-33/Job-34 ctx-5fc7b113) Unable to update
>>> VM[SecondaryStorageVm|s-1-VM]: DB Data={Host=1; State=Running;
>>> updated=19; time=Fri Mar 14 01:57:11 MDT 2014} New Data: {Host=1;
>>> State=Running; updated=19; time=Fri Mar 14 01:57:11 MDT 2014} Stale
>>> Data: {Host=1; State=Starting; updated=18; time=Fri Mar 14 01:56:38
>>> MDT 2014}
>>> 2014-03-14 01:57:46,359 ERROR [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl]
>>> (Work-Job-Executor-1:Job-33/Job-34 ctx-5fc7b113) Failed to start
>>> instance VM[SecondaryStorageVm|s-1-VM]
>>> com.cloud.exception.ConcurrentOperationException: Unable to transition
>>> to a new state.
>>> at 
>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineMa
>>>n
>>>agerImpl.java:1029)
>>> at 
>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineMa
>>>n
>>>agerImpl.java:5129)
>>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
>>> at 
>>>sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.jav
>>>a
>>>:57)
>>> at 
>>>sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessor
>>>I
>>>mpl.java:43)
>>> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
>>> at 
>>>com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobHandlerProxy.handleVmWorkJob(VmWorkJobHandlerProxy
>>>.
>>>java:107)
>>> at 
>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.handleVmWorkJob(VirtualMachineMan
>>>a
>>>gerImpl.java:5274)
>>> at 
>>>com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobDispatcher.runJob(VmWorkJobDispatcher.java:102)
>>> at 
>>>org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.runInCon
>>>t
>>>ext(AsyncJobManagerImpl.java:491)
>>> at 
>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable$1.run(Manag
>>>e
>>>dContextRunnable.java:49)
>>> at 
>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext$1.call(
>>>D
>>>efaultManagedContext.java:56)
>>> at 
>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.callWit
>>>h
>>>Context(DefaultManagedContext.java:103)
>>> at 
>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.runWith
>>>C
>>>ontext(DefaultManagedContext.java:53)
>>> at 
>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable.run(Managed
>>>C
>>>ontextRunnable.java:46)
>>> at 
>>>org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.run(Asyn
>>>c
>>>JobManagerImpl.java:448)
>>> at 
>>>java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:471)
>>> at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:262)
>>> at 
>>>java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.jav
>>>a
>>>:1145)
>>> at 
>>>java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.ja
>>>v
>>>a:615)
>>> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:744)
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 11:30 PM, Marcus <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Min, in looking at this branch merge, I need to be reminded whether we
>>>> are supposed to squash feature branches when they come in, or preserve
>>>> history. It's nice to preserve history, but it's a lot easier to undo
>>>> a squashed merge.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>> IAM branch is now merged to master.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>> -min
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/13/14 10:13 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Since we haven't heard of any objections to this merge for 3 days, I
>>>>>>am
>>>>>>going to merge it to master today.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Thanks
>>>>>>-min
>>>>>>
>>>>>>On 3/11/14 12:23 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On 11 mrt. 2014, at 19:52, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Also, have already run FingBugs on our branch and addressed all
>>>>>>>>new
>>>>>>>> findings introduced by our branch.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Awesome! :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 3/10/14 7:33 PM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No new jar dependencies.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Any new jar dependencies?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and Access
>>>>>>>>>>> Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch.
>>>>>>>>>>>Development
>>>>>>>>>>>for
>>>>>>>>>>> this effort has been done by Prachi and me on ACS rbac branch
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>(https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shor
>>>>>>>>>>>t
>>>>>>>>>>>log;
>>>>>>>>>>>h
>>>>>>>>>>>=r
>>>>>>>>>>> ef
>>>>>>>>>>> s/heads/rbac).
>>>>>>>>>>> Checklists for the merge:
>>>>>>>>>>> 1. JIRA ticket:
>>>>>>>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Functional Specs:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStac
>>>>>>>>>>>k
>>>>>>>>>>>+Ide
>>>>>>>>>>>n
>>>>>>>>>>>ti
>>>>>>>>>>> ty
>>>>>>>>>>> +and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed this
>>>>>>>>>>>feature
>>>>>>>>>>> back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our
>>>>>>>>>>>implementation.
>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Unit tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>>>>> services/iam/server/test
>>>>>>>>>>> (for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam plugin).
>>>>>>>>>>> 4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>>>>> test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
>>>>>>>>>>> 5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit
>>>>>>>>>>> 63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
>>>>>>>>>>> 6. RAT test has been passed.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>

Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Posted by Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com>.

Before merge, I did a sanity zone and VM deployment test, and worked fine
on my setup after fixing the issues introduced by Antonio's commit. I can
verify this again today. From the symptom, it seems not related to IAM
change.

Thanks
-min



On 3/14/14 1:07 AM, "Marcus" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:

>creating a new router does the same...
>
>2014-03-14 02:06:41,446 DEBUG [vm.dao.VMInstanceDaoImpl]
>(Work-Job-Executor-5:Job-41/Job-42 ctx-91928df8) Unable to update
>VM[DomainRouter|r-5-VM]: DB Data={Host=1; State=Running; updated=3;
>time=Fri Mar 14 02:06:11 MDT 2014} New Data: {Host=1; State=Running;
>updated=3; time=Fri Mar 14 02:06:11 MDT 2014} Stale Data: {Host=1;
>State=Starting; updated=2; time=Fri Mar 14 02:05:52 MDT 2014}
>2014-03-14 02:06:41,448 ERROR [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl]
>(Work-Job-Executor-5:Job-41/Job-42 ctx-91928df8) Failed to start
>instance VM[DomainRouter|r-5-VM]
>com.cloud.exception.ConcurrentOperationException: Unable to transition
>to a new state.
>at 
>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineMana
>gerImpl.java:1029)
>at 
>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.advanceStart(VirtualMachineManagerI
>mpl.java:775)
>
>On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 2:03 AM, Marcus <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I have no idea if its related to this branch merge or not, but I'm
>> unable to start the ssvm on master since I pulled about an hour ago. I
>> can deploy a fresh zone, and the ssvm will actually start, but it
>> can't transition state in the DB, so it kills the vm.
>>
>> 2014-03-14 01:57:46,356 DEBUG [vm.dao.VMInstanceDaoImpl]
>> (Work-Job-Executor-1:Job-33/Job-34 ctx-5fc7b113) Unable to update
>> VM[SecondaryStorageVm|s-1-VM]: DB Data={Host=1; State=Running;
>> updated=19; time=Fri Mar 14 01:57:11 MDT 2014} New Data: {Host=1;
>> State=Running; updated=19; time=Fri Mar 14 01:57:11 MDT 2014} Stale
>> Data: {Host=1; State=Starting; updated=18; time=Fri Mar 14 01:56:38
>> MDT 2014}
>> 2014-03-14 01:57:46,359 ERROR [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl]
>> (Work-Job-Executor-1:Job-33/Job-34 ctx-5fc7b113) Failed to start
>> instance VM[SecondaryStorageVm|s-1-VM]
>> com.cloud.exception.ConcurrentOperationException: Unable to transition
>> to a new state.
>> at 
>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineMan
>>agerImpl.java:1029)
>> at 
>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineMan
>>agerImpl.java:5129)
>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
>> at 
>>sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java
>>:57)
>> at 
>>sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorI
>>mpl.java:43)
>> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
>> at 
>>com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobHandlerProxy.handleVmWorkJob(VmWorkJobHandlerProxy.
>>java:107)
>> at 
>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.handleVmWorkJob(VirtualMachineMana
>>gerImpl.java:5274)
>> at com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobDispatcher.runJob(VmWorkJobDispatcher.java:102)
>> at 
>>org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.runInCont
>>ext(AsyncJobManagerImpl.java:491)
>> at 
>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable$1.run(Manage
>>dContextRunnable.java:49)
>> at 
>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext$1.call(D
>>efaultManagedContext.java:56)
>> at 
>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.callWith
>>Context(DefaultManagedContext.java:103)
>> at 
>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.runWithC
>>ontext(DefaultManagedContext.java:53)
>> at 
>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable.run(ManagedC
>>ontextRunnable.java:46)
>> at 
>>org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.run(Async
>>JobManagerImpl.java:448)
>> at 
>>java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:471)
>> at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:262)
>> at 
>>java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java
>>:1145)
>> at 
>>java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.jav
>>a:615)
>> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:744)
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 11:30 PM, Marcus <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Min, in looking at this branch merge, I need to be reminded whether we
>>> are supposed to squash feature branches when they come in, or preserve
>>> history. It's nice to preserve history, but it's a lot easier to undo
>>> a squashed merge.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>> IAM branch is now merged to master.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> -min
>>>>
>>>> On 3/13/14 10:13 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Since we haven't heard of any objections to this merge for 3 days, I
>>>>>am
>>>>>going to merge it to master today.
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks
>>>>>-min
>>>>>
>>>>>On 3/11/14 12:23 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>On 11 mrt. 2014, at 19:52, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also, have already run FingBugs on our branch and addressed all new
>>>>>>> findings introduced by our branch.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Awesome! :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 3/10/14 7:33 PM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No new jar dependencies.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Any new jar dependencies?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and Access
>>>>>>>>>> Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch.
>>>>>>>>>>Development
>>>>>>>>>>for
>>>>>>>>>> this effort has been done by Prachi and me on ACS rbac branch
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>(https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=short
>>>>>>>>>>log;
>>>>>>>>>>h
>>>>>>>>>>=r
>>>>>>>>>> ef
>>>>>>>>>> s/heads/rbac).
>>>>>>>>>> Checklists for the merge:
>>>>>>>>>> 1. JIRA ticket:
>>>>>>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
>>>>>>>>>> 2. Functional Specs:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack
>>>>>>>>>>+Ide
>>>>>>>>>>n
>>>>>>>>>>ti
>>>>>>>>>> ty
>>>>>>>>>> +and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed this
>>>>>>>>>>feature
>>>>>>>>>> back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our
>>>>>>>>>>implementation.
>>>>>>>>>> 3. Unit tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>>>> services/iam/server/test
>>>>>>>>>> (for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam plugin).
>>>>>>>>>> 4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>>>> test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
>>>>>>>>>> 5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit
>>>>>>>>>> 63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
>>>>>>>>>> 6. RAT test has been passed.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>

Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Posted by Marcus <sh...@gmail.com>.

creating a new router does the same...

2014-03-14 02:06:41,446 DEBUG [vm.dao.VMInstanceDaoImpl]
(Work-Job-Executor-5:Job-41/Job-42 ctx-91928df8) Unable to update
VM[DomainRouter|r-5-VM]: DB Data={Host=1; State=Running; updated=3;
time=Fri Mar 14 02:06:11 MDT 2014} New Data: {Host=1; State=Running;
updated=3; time=Fri Mar 14 02:06:11 MDT 2014} Stale Data: {Host=1;
State=Starting; updated=2; time=Fri Mar 14 02:05:52 MDT 2014}
2014-03-14 02:06:41,448 ERROR [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl]
(Work-Job-Executor-5:Job-41/Job-42 ctx-91928df8) Failed to start
instance VM[DomainRouter|r-5-VM]
com.cloud.exception.ConcurrentOperationException: Unable to transition
to a new state.
at com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineManagerImpl.java:1029)
at com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.advanceStart(VirtualMachineManagerImpl.java:775)

On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 2:03 AM, Marcus <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have no idea if its related to this branch merge or not, but I'm
> unable to start the ssvm on master since I pulled about an hour ago. I
> can deploy a fresh zone, and the ssvm will actually start, but it
> can't transition state in the DB, so it kills the vm.
>
> 2014-03-14 01:57:46,356 DEBUG [vm.dao.VMInstanceDaoImpl]
> (Work-Job-Executor-1:Job-33/Job-34 ctx-5fc7b113) Unable to update
> VM[SecondaryStorageVm|s-1-VM]: DB Data={Host=1; State=Running;
> updated=19; time=Fri Mar 14 01:57:11 MDT 2014} New Data: {Host=1;
> State=Running; updated=19; time=Fri Mar 14 01:57:11 MDT 2014} Stale
> Data: {Host=1; State=Starting; updated=18; time=Fri Mar 14 01:56:38
> MDT 2014}
> 2014-03-14 01:57:46,359 ERROR [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl]
> (Work-Job-Executor-1:Job-33/Job-34 ctx-5fc7b113) Failed to start
> instance VM[SecondaryStorageVm|s-1-VM]
> com.cloud.exception.ConcurrentOperationException: Unable to transition
> to a new state.
> at com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineManagerImpl.java:1029)
> at com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineManagerImpl.java:5129)
> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:57)
> at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
> at com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobHandlerProxy.handleVmWorkJob(VmWorkJobHandlerProxy.java:107)
> at com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.handleVmWorkJob(VirtualMachineManagerImpl.java:5274)
> at com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobDispatcher.runJob(VmWorkJobDispatcher.java:102)
> at org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.runInContext(AsyncJobManagerImpl.java:491)
> at org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable$1.run(ManagedContextRunnable.java:49)
> at org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext$1.call(DefaultManagedContext.java:56)
> at org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.callWithContext(DefaultManagedContext.java:103)
> at org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.runWithContext(DefaultManagedContext.java:53)
> at org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable.run(ManagedContextRunnable.java:46)
> at org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.run(AsyncJobManagerImpl.java:448)
> at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:471)
> at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:262)
> at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1145)
> at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:615)
> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:744)
>
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 11:30 PM, Marcus <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Min, in looking at this branch merge, I need to be reminded whether we
>> are supposed to squash feature branches when they come in, or preserve
>> history. It's nice to preserve history, but it's a lot easier to undo
>> a squashed merge.
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>> IAM branch is now merged to master.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> -min
>>>
>>> On 3/13/14 10:13 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Since we haven't heard of any objections to this merge for 3 days, I am
>>>>going to merge it to master today.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks
>>>>-min
>>>>
>>>>On 3/11/14 12:23 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>On 11 mrt. 2014, at 19:52, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, have already run FingBugs on our branch and addressed all new
>>>>>> findings introduced by our branch.
>>>>>
>>>>>Awesome! :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/10/14 7:33 PM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No new jar dependencies.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Any new jar dependencies?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and Access
>>>>>>>>> Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch. Development
>>>>>>>>>for
>>>>>>>>> this effort has been done by Prachi and me on ACS rbac branch
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>(https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;
>>>>>>>>>h
>>>>>>>>>=r
>>>>>>>>> ef
>>>>>>>>> s/heads/rbac).
>>>>>>>>> Checklists for the merge:
>>>>>>>>> 1. JIRA ticket:
>>>>>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
>>>>>>>>> 2. Functional Specs:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+Ide
>>>>>>>>>n
>>>>>>>>>ti
>>>>>>>>> ty
>>>>>>>>> +and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed this
>>>>>>>>>feature
>>>>>>>>> back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our
>>>>>>>>>implementation.
>>>>>>>>> 3. Unit tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>>> services/iam/server/test
>>>>>>>>> (for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam plugin).
>>>>>>>>> 4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>>> test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
>>>>>>>>> 5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit
>>>>>>>>> 63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
>>>>>>>>> 6. RAT test has been passed.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>

Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Posted by Marcus <sh...@gmail.com>.

I have no idea if its related to this branch merge or not, but I'm
unable to start the ssvm on master since I pulled about an hour ago. I
can deploy a fresh zone, and the ssvm will actually start, but it
can't transition state in the DB, so it kills the vm.

2014-03-14 01:57:46,356 DEBUG [vm.dao.VMInstanceDaoImpl]
(Work-Job-Executor-1:Job-33/Job-34 ctx-5fc7b113) Unable to update
VM[SecondaryStorageVm|s-1-VM]: DB Data={Host=1; State=Running;
updated=19; time=Fri Mar 14 01:57:11 MDT 2014} New Data: {Host=1;
State=Running; updated=19; time=Fri Mar 14 01:57:11 MDT 2014} Stale
Data: {Host=1; State=Starting; updated=18; time=Fri Mar 14 01:56:38
MDT 2014}
2014-03-14 01:57:46,359 ERROR [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl]
(Work-Job-Executor-1:Job-33/Job-34 ctx-5fc7b113) Failed to start
instance VM[SecondaryStorageVm|s-1-VM]
com.cloud.exception.ConcurrentOperationException: Unable to transition
to a new state.
at com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineManagerImpl.java:1029)
at com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineManagerImpl.java:5129)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:57)
at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
at com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobHandlerProxy.handleVmWorkJob(VmWorkJobHandlerProxy.java:107)
at com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.handleVmWorkJob(VirtualMachineManagerImpl.java:5274)
at com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobDispatcher.runJob(VmWorkJobDispatcher.java:102)
at org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.runInContext(AsyncJobManagerImpl.java:491)
at org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable$1.run(ManagedContextRunnable.java:49)
at org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext$1.call(DefaultManagedContext.java:56)
at org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.callWithContext(DefaultManagedContext.java:103)
at org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.runWithContext(DefaultManagedContext.java:53)
at org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable.run(ManagedContextRunnable.java:46)
at org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.run(AsyncJobManagerImpl.java:448)
at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:471)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:262)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1145)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:615)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:744)

On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 11:30 PM, Marcus <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Min, in looking at this branch merge, I need to be reminded whether we
> are supposed to squash feature branches when they come in, or preserve
> history. It's nice to preserve history, but it's a lot easier to undo
> a squashed merge.
>
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>> IAM branch is now merged to master.
>>
>> Thanks
>> -min
>>
>> On 3/13/14 10:13 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Since we haven't heard of any objections to this merge for 3 days, I am
>>>going to merge it to master today.
>>>
>>>Thanks
>>>-min
>>>
>>>On 3/11/14 12:23 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>On 11 mrt. 2014, at 19:52, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Also, have already run FingBugs on our branch and addressed all new
>>>>> findings introduced by our branch.
>>>>
>>>>Awesome! :-)
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>> -min
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/10/14 7:33 PM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> No new jar dependencies.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Any new jar dependencies?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and Access
>>>>>>>> Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch. Development
>>>>>>>>for
>>>>>>>> this effort has been done by Prachi and me on ACS rbac branch
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>(https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;
>>>>>>>>h
>>>>>>>>=r
>>>>>>>> ef
>>>>>>>> s/heads/rbac).
>>>>>>>> Checklists for the merge:
>>>>>>>> 1. JIRA ticket:
>>>>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
>>>>>>>> 2. Functional Specs:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+Ide
>>>>>>>>n
>>>>>>>>ti
>>>>>>>> ty
>>>>>>>> +and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed this
>>>>>>>>feature
>>>>>>>> back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our
>>>>>>>>implementation.
>>>>>>>> 3. Unit tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>> services/iam/server/test
>>>>>>>> (for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam plugin).
>>>>>>>> 4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>> test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
>>>>>>>> 5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit
>>>>>>>> 63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
>>>>>>>> 6. RAT test has been passed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>

Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Posted by Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com>.

Thanks Marcus. I am not aware of this convention, will remember that next
time when I do the merge.

-min

On 3/13/14 10:30 PM, "Marcus" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Min, in looking at this branch merge, I need to be reminded whether we
>are supposed to squash feature branches when they come in, or preserve
>history. It's nice to preserve history, but it's a lot easier to undo
>a squashed merge.
>
>On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>> IAM branch is now merged to master.
>>
>> Thanks
>> -min
>>
>> On 3/13/14 10:13 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Since we haven't heard of any objections to this merge for 3 days, I am
>>>going to merge it to master today.
>>>
>>>Thanks
>>>-min
>>>
>>>On 3/11/14 12:23 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>On 11 mrt. 2014, at 19:52, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Also, have already run FingBugs on our branch and addressed all new
>>>>> findings introduced by our branch.
>>>>
>>>>Awesome! :-)
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>> -min
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/10/14 7:33 PM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> No new jar dependencies.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Any new jar dependencies?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and Access
>>>>>>>> Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch. Development
>>>>>>>>for
>>>>>>>> this effort has been done by Prachi and me on ACS rbac branch
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>(https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlo
>>>>>>>>g;
>>>>>>>>h
>>>>>>>>=r
>>>>>>>> ef
>>>>>>>> s/heads/rbac).
>>>>>>>> Checklists for the merge:
>>>>>>>> 1. JIRA ticket:
>>>>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
>>>>>>>> 2. Functional Specs:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+I
>>>>>>>>de
>>>>>>>>n
>>>>>>>>ti
>>>>>>>> ty
>>>>>>>> +and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed this
>>>>>>>>feature
>>>>>>>> back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our
>>>>>>>>implementation.
>>>>>>>> 3. Unit tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>> services/iam/server/test
>>>>>>>> (for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam plugin).
>>>>>>>> 4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>> test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
>>>>>>>> 5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit
>>>>>>>> 63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
>>>>>>>> 6. RAT test has been passed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>

Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Posted by Marcus <sh...@gmail.com>.

Min, in looking at this branch merge, I need to be reminded whether we
are supposed to squash feature branches when they come in, or preserve
history. It's nice to preserve history, but it's a lot easier to undo
a squashed merge.

On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
> IAM branch is now merged to master.
>
> Thanks
> -min
>
> On 3/13/14 10:13 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>>Since we haven't heard of any objections to this merge for 3 days, I am
>>going to merge it to master today.
>>
>>Thanks
>>-min
>>
>>On 3/11/14 12:23 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>On 11 mrt. 2014, at 19:52, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Also, have already run FingBugs on our branch and addressed all new
>>>> findings introduced by our branch.
>>>
>>>Awesome! :-)
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.
>>>> -min
>>>>
>>>> On 3/10/14 7:33 PM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> No new jar dependencies.
>>>>>
>>>>> -min
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any new jar dependencies?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and Access
>>>>>>> Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch. Development
>>>>>>>for
>>>>>>> this effort has been done by Prachi and me on ACS rbac branch
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>(https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;
>>>>>>>h
>>>>>>>=r
>>>>>>> ef
>>>>>>> s/heads/rbac).
>>>>>>> Checklists for the merge:
>>>>>>> 1. JIRA ticket:
>>>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
>>>>>>> 2. Functional Specs:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+Ide
>>>>>>>n
>>>>>>>ti
>>>>>>> ty
>>>>>>> +and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed this
>>>>>>>feature
>>>>>>> back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our
>>>>>>>implementation.
>>>>>>> 3. Unit tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>> services/iam/server/test
>>>>>>> (for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam plugin).
>>>>>>> 4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>> test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
>>>>>>> 5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit
>>>>>>> 63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
>>>>>>> 6. RAT test has been passed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Posted by Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com>.

IAM branch is now merged to master.

Thanks
-min

On 3/13/14 10:13 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:

>Since we haven't heard of any objections to this merge for 3 days, I am
>going to merge it to master today.
>
>Thanks
>-min
>
>On 3/11/14 12:23 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>
>>
>>On 11 mrt. 2014, at 19:52, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Also, have already run FingBugs on our branch and addressed all new
>>> findings introduced by our branch.
>>
>>Awesome! :-)
>>
>>> 
>>> Thanks.
>>> -min
>>> 
>>> On 3/10/14 7:33 PM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> No new jar dependencies.
>>>> 
>>>> -min
>>>> 
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>> 
>>>>> On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Any new jar dependencies?
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and Access
>>>>>> Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch. Development
>>>>>>for
>>>>>> this effort has been done by Prachi and me on ACS rbac branch
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>(https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;
>>>>>>h
>>>>>>=r
>>>>>> ef
>>>>>> s/heads/rbac).
>>>>>> Checklists for the merge:
>>>>>> 1. JIRA ticket:
>>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
>>>>>> 2. Functional Specs:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+Ide
>>>>>>n
>>>>>>ti
>>>>>> ty
>>>>>> +and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed this
>>>>>>feature
>>>>>> back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our
>>>>>>implementation.
>>>>>> 3. Unit tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>> services/iam/server/test
>>>>>> (for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam plugin).
>>>>>> 4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>> test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
>>>>>> 5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit
>>>>>> 63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
>>>>>> 6. RAT test has been passed.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>> -min
>>>>> 
>>> 
>>
>

Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Posted by Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com>.

Since we haven't heard of any objections to this merge for 3 days, I am
going to merge it to master today.

Thanks
-min

On 3/11/14 12:23 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:

>
>On 11 mrt. 2014, at 19:52, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>> Also, have already run FingBugs on our branch and addressed all new
>> findings introduced by our branch.
>
>Awesome! :-)
>
>> 
>> Thanks.
>> -min
>> 
>> On 3/10/14 7:33 PM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> No new jar dependencies.
>>> 
>>> -min
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
>>>> On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Any new jar dependencies?
>>>> 
>>>>> On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and Access
>>>>> Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch. Development for
>>>>> this effort has been done by Prachi and me on ACS rbac branch
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>(https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h
>>>>>=r
>>>>> ef
>>>>> s/heads/rbac).
>>>>> Checklists for the merge:
>>>>> 1. JIRA ticket:
>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
>>>>> 2. Functional Specs:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+Iden
>>>>>ti
>>>>> ty
>>>>> +and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed this
>>>>>feature
>>>>> back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our
>>>>>implementation.
>>>>> 3. Unit tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>> services/iam/server/test
>>>>> (for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam plugin).
>>>>> 4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>> test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
>>>>> 5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit
>>>>> 63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
>>>>> 6. RAT test has been passed.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>> -min
>>>> 
>> 
>

Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Posted by Hugo Trippaers <hu...@trippaers.nl>.

On 11 mrt. 2014, at 19:52, Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:

> Also, have already run FingBugs on our branch and addressed all new
> findings introduced by our branch.

Awesome! :-)

> 
> Thanks.
> -min
> 
> On 3/10/14 7:33 PM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
> 
>> No new jar dependencies.
>> 
>> -min
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Any new jar dependencies?
>>> 
>>>> On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hi,
>>>> 
>>>> Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and Access
>>>> Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch. Development for
>>>> this effort has been done by Prachi and me on ACS rbac branch
>>>> 
>>>> (https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=r
>>>> ef
>>>> s/heads/rbac).
>>>> Checklists for the merge:
>>>> 1. JIRA ticket: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
>>>> 2. Functional Specs:
>>>> 
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+Identi
>>>> ty
>>>> +and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed this feature
>>>> back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our implementation.
>>>> 3. Unit tests for the feature are available at:
>>>> services/iam/server/test
>>>> (for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam plugin).
>>>> 4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available at:
>>>> test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
>>>> 5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit
>>>> 63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
>>>> 6. RAT test has been passed.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks.
>>>> -min
>>> 
>

Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Posted by Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com>.

Also, have already run FingBugs on our branch and addressed all new
findings introduced by our branch.

Thanks.
-min

On 3/10/14 7:33 PM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:

>No new jar dependencies.
>
>-min
>
>Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>><Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Any new jar dependencies?
>> 
>>> On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and Access
>>> Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch. Development for
>>> this effort has been done by Prachi and me on ACS rbac branch
>>> 
>>>(https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=r
>>>ef
>>> s/heads/rbac).
>>> Checklists for the merge:
>>> 1. JIRA ticket: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
>>> 2. Functional Specs:
>>> 
>>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+Identi
>>>ty
>>> +and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed this feature
>>> back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our implementation.
>>> 3. Unit tests for the feature are available at:
>>>services/iam/server/test
>>> (for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam plugin).
>>> 4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available at:
>>> test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
>>> 5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit
>>> 63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
>>> 6. RAT test has been passed.
>>> 
>>> Thanks.
>>> -min
>>

Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Posted by Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com>.

No new jar dependencies.

-min

Sent from my iPhone

> On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal" <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
> 
> Any new jar dependencies?
> 
>> On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and Access
>> Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch. Development for
>> this effort has been done by Prachi and me on ACS rbac branch
>> (https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=ref
>> s/heads/rbac).
>> Checklists for the merge:
>> 1. JIRA ticket: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
>> 2. Functional Specs:
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+Identity
>> +and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed this feature
>> back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our implementation.
>> 3. Unit tests for the feature are available at: services/iam/server/test
>> (for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam plugin).
>> 4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available at:
>> test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
>> 5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit
>> 63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
>> 6. RAT test has been passed.
>> 
>> Thanks.
>> -min
>

Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Posted by Chiradeep Vittal <Ch...@citrix.com>.

Any new jar dependencies?

On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min Chen" <mi...@citrix.com> wrote:

>Hi,
>
>Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and Access
>Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch. Development for
>this effort has been done by Prachi and me on ACS rbac branch
>(https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=ref
>s/heads/rbac).
>Checklists for the merge:
>1. JIRA ticket: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
>2. Functional Specs:
>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+Identity
>+and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed this feature
>back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our implementation.
>3. Unit tests for the feature are available at: services/iam/server/test
>(for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam plugin).
>4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available at:
>test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
>5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit
>63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
>6. RAT test has been passed.
>
>Thanks.
>-min
>
>
>

[Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master

Posted by Min Chen <mi...@citrix.com>.

Hi,

Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and Access Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch. Development for this effort has been done by Prachi and me on ACS rbac branch (https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/rbac).
Checklists for the merge:
1. JIRA ticket: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
2. Functional Specs:  https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+Identity+and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed this feature back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our implementation.
3. Unit tests for the feature are available at: services/iam/server/test (for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam plugin).
4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available at: test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit 63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
6. RAT test has been passed.

Thanks.
-min