You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cloudstack.apache.org by "Chip Childers (ASF)" <ch...@apache.org> on 2012/10/11 03:21:20 UTC
[VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Hi All,
I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release
4.0.0-incubating.
Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+test+procedure
We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
give it a shot!
The following artifacts are up for the vote:
http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.0-incubating/
PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
Git Branch and Commit SH:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
List of changes:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
Vote will be open for 72 hours.
For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be
sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
[ ] +1 approve
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
Thanks!
-chip
RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Pradeep Soundararajan <pr...@citrix.com>.
+1
-----Original Message-----
From: chip.childers@sungard.com [mailto:chip.childers@sungard.com] On Behalf Of Chip Childers (ASF)
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 6:51 AM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Hi All,
I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release 4.0.0-incubating.
Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+test+procedure
We encourage the whole community to download and test these release artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please give it a shot!
The following artifacts are up for the vote:
http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.0-incubating/
PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
Git Branch and Commit SH:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
List of changes:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
Vote will be open for 72 hours.
For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
[ ] +1 approve
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
Thanks!
-chip
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Chiradeep Vittal <Ch...@citrix.com>.
+1
--
Chiradeep
On Oct 10, 2012, at 18:22, "Chip Childers (ASF)" <ch...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release
> 4.0.0-incubating.
>
> Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+test+procedure
>
> We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
> artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
> give it a shot!
>
>
> The following artifacts are up for the vote:
> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.0-incubating/
>
> PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
>
> Git Branch and Commit SH:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
> Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
>
> List of changes:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
>
>
> Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
>
> For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be
> sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
> [ ] +1 approve
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>
> Thanks!
>
> -chip
RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Will Chan <wi...@citrix.com>.
+1 (binding)
________________________________________
From: Will Chan [will.chan@citrix.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 6:28 PM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
+1
First!
________________________________________
From: chip.childers@sungard.com [chip.childers@sungard.com] On Behalf Of Chip Childers (ASF) [chipchilders@apache.org]
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 6:21 PM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Hi All,
I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release
4.0.0-incubating.
Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+test+procedure
We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
give it a shot!
The following artifacts are up for the vote:
http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.0-incubating/
PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
Git Branch and Commit SH:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
List of changes:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
Vote will be open for 72 hours.
For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be
sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
[ ] +1 approve
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
Thanks!
-chip
RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Will Chan <wi...@citrix.com>.
+1
First!
________________________________________
From: chip.childers@sungard.com [chip.childers@sungard.com] On Behalf Of Chip Childers (ASF) [chipchilders@apache.org]
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 6:21 PM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Hi All,
I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release
4.0.0-incubating.
Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+test+procedure
We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
give it a shot!
The following artifacts are up for the vote:
http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.0-incubating/
PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
Git Branch and Commit SH:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
List of changes:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
Vote will be open for 72 hours.
For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be
sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
[ ] +1 approve
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
Thanks!
-chip
RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Sailaja Mada <sa...@citrix.com>.
+1
Thanks,
Sailaja.M
-----Original Message-----
From: chip.childers@sungard.com [mailto:chip.childers@sungard.com] On Behalf Of Chip Childers (ASF)
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 6:51 AM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Hi All,
I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release 4.0.0-incubating.
Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+test+procedure
We encourage the whole community to download and test these release artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please give it a shot!
The following artifacts are up for the vote:
http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.0-incubating/
PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
Git Branch and Commit SH:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
List of changes:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
Vote will be open for 72 hours.
For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
[ ] +1 approve
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
Thanks!
-chip
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by John Kinsella <jl...@stratosec.co>.
+1 (binding)
Awesome work guys!
On Oct 10, 2012, at 6:21 PM, "Chip Childers (ASF)" <ch...@apache.org>
wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release
> 4.0.0-incubating.
>
> Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+test+procedure
>
> We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
> artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
> give it a shot!
>
>
> The following artifacts are up for the vote:
> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.0-incubating/
>
> PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
>
> Git Branch and Commit SH:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
> Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
>
> List of changes:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
>
>
> Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
>
> For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be
> sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
> [ ] +1 approve
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>
> Thanks!
>
> -chip
>
Stratosec - Secure Infrastructure as a Service
o: 415.315.9385
@johnlkinsella
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Alena Prokharchyk <Al...@citrix.com>.
+1
Thanks everyone for great work!
-Alena.
On 10/10/12 9:34 PM, "Sheng Yang" <sh...@yasker.org> wrote:
>+1
>
>--Sheng
>
>On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 9:29 PM, Mice Xia <mi...@tcloudcomputing.com>
>wrote:
>> +1
>>
>> -Mice
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Rohit Yadav [mailto:rohit.yadav@citrix.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 12:24 PM
>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first
>>round
>>
>> +1
>> Cheers!
>> ________________________________________
>> From: Radhika Puthiyetath [radhika.puthiyetath@citrix.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 9:46 AM
>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first
>>round
>>
>> +1
>> Great work !
>>
>> -Radhika
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Kelven Yang [mailto:kelven.yang@citrix.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 9:43 AM
>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first
>>round
>>
>> +1
>>
>> Kelven
>>
>> On 10/10/12 9:05 PM, "Prachi Damle" <Pr...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>
>>>+1 !
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: Sateesh Chodapuneedi [mailto:sateesh.chodapuneedi@citrix.com]
>>>Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 9:04 PM
>>>To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first
>>>round
>>>
>>>+1, great start!
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>Sateesh
>>>
>>>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>---
>>>--------------------------------------------------
>>>"This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)
>>>and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Any
>>>unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If
>>>you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply
>>>e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message."
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Edison Su [mailto:Edison.su@citrix.com]
>>>> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 9:26 AM
>>>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>> Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first
>>>> round
>>>>
>>>> +1, we are finally there!
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>> On Oct 10, 2012, at 6:21 PM, "Chip Childers (ASF)"
>>>><ch...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Hi All,
>>>> >
>>>> > I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating)
>>>> > Release 4.0.0-incubating.
>>>> >
>>>> > Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found
>>>>here:
>>>> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.
>>>> > 0+test+procedure
>>>> >
>>>> > We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
>>>> > artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
>>>> > release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so
>>>> > please give it a shot!
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > The following artifacts are up for the vote:
>>>> > http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.
>>>> > 0-incubating/
>>>> >
>>>> > PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
>>>> > http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
>>>> >
>>>> > Git Branch and Commit SH:
>>>> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;
>>>> > a
>>>> > =shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
>>>> > Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
>>>> >
>>>> > List of changes:
>>>> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;
>>>> > a
>>>> > =blob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please
>>>> > be sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
>>>> > [ ] +1 approve
>>>> > [ ] +0 no opinion
>>>> > [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>>>> >
>>>> > Thanks!
>>>> >
>>>> > -chip
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Sheng Yang <sh...@yasker.org>.
+1
--Sheng
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 9:29 PM, Mice Xia <mi...@tcloudcomputing.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> -Mice
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rohit Yadav [mailto:rohit.yadav@citrix.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 12:24 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
>
> +1
> Cheers!
> ________________________________________
> From: Radhika Puthiyetath [radhika.puthiyetath@citrix.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 9:46 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
>
> +1
> Great work !
>
> -Radhika
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kelven Yang [mailto:kelven.yang@citrix.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 9:43 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
>
> +1
>
> Kelven
>
> On 10/10/12 9:05 PM, "Prachi Damle" <Pr...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>>+1 !
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Sateesh Chodapuneedi [mailto:sateesh.chodapuneedi@citrix.com]
>>Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 9:04 PM
>>To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first
>>round
>>
>>+1, great start!
>>
>>Regards,
>>Sateesh
>>
>>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>---
>>--------------------------------------------------
>>"This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)
>>and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Any
>>unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If
>>you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply
>>e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message."
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Edison Su [mailto:Edison.su@citrix.com]
>>> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 9:26 AM
>>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first
>>> round
>>>
>>> +1, we are finally there!
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On Oct 10, 2012, at 6:21 PM, "Chip Childers (ASF)"
>>><ch...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Hi All,
>>> >
>>> > I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating)
>>> > Release 4.0.0-incubating.
>>> >
>>> > Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found
>>>here:
>>> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.
>>> > 0+test+procedure
>>> >
>>> > We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
>>> > artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
>>> > release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so
>>> > please give it a shot!
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > The following artifacts are up for the vote:
>>> > http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.
>>> > 0-incubating/
>>> >
>>> > PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
>>> > http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
>>> >
>>> > Git Branch and Commit SH:
>>> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;
>>> > a
>>> > =shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
>>> > Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
>>> >
>>> > List of changes:
>>> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;
>>> > a
>>> > =blob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please
>>> > be sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
>>> > [ ] +1 approve
>>> > [ ] +0 no opinion
>>> > [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>>> >
>>> > Thanks!
>>> >
>>> > -chip
>
RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Mice Xia <mi...@tcloudcomputing.com>.
+1
-Mice
-----Original Message-----
From: Rohit Yadav [mailto:rohit.yadav@citrix.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 12:24 PM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
+1
Cheers!
________________________________________
From: Radhika Puthiyetath [radhika.puthiyetath@citrix.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 9:46 AM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
+1
Great work !
-Radhika
-----Original Message-----
From: Kelven Yang [mailto:kelven.yang@citrix.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 9:43 AM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
+1
Kelven
On 10/10/12 9:05 PM, "Prachi Damle" <Pr...@citrix.com> wrote:
>+1 !
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Sateesh Chodapuneedi [mailto:sateesh.chodapuneedi@citrix.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 9:04 PM
>To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first
>round
>
>+1, great start!
>
>Regards,
>Sateesh
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>---
>--------------------------------------------------
>"This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)
>and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Any
>unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If
>you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply
>e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message."
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Edison Su [mailto:Edison.su@citrix.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 9:26 AM
>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first
>> round
>>
>> +1, we are finally there!
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Oct 10, 2012, at 6:21 PM, "Chip Childers (ASF)"
>><ch...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi All,
>> >
>> > I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating)
>> > Release 4.0.0-incubating.
>> >
>> > Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found
>>here:
>> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.
>> > 0+test+procedure
>> >
>> > We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
>> > artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
>> > release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so
>> > please give it a shot!
>> >
>> >
>> > The following artifacts are up for the vote:
>> > http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.
>> > 0-incubating/
>> >
>> > PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
>> > http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
>> >
>> > Git Branch and Commit SH:
>> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;
>> > a
>> > =shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
>> > Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
>> >
>> > List of changes:
>> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;
>> > a
>> > =blob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
>> >
>> >
>> > Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>> >
>> >
>> > For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please
>> > be sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
>> > [ ] +1 approve
>> > [ ] +0 no opinion
>> > [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>> >
>> > Thanks!
>> >
>> > -chip
RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Rohit Yadav <ro...@citrix.com>.
+1
Cheers!
________________________________________
From: Radhika Puthiyetath [radhika.puthiyetath@citrix.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 9:46 AM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
+1
Great work !
-Radhika
-----Original Message-----
From: Kelven Yang [mailto:kelven.yang@citrix.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 9:43 AM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
+1
Kelven
On 10/10/12 9:05 PM, "Prachi Damle" <Pr...@citrix.com> wrote:
>+1 !
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Sateesh Chodapuneedi [mailto:sateesh.chodapuneedi@citrix.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 9:04 PM
>To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first
>round
>
>+1, great start!
>
>Regards,
>Sateesh
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>---
>--------------------------------------------------
>"This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)
>and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Any
>unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If
>you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply
>e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message."
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Edison Su [mailto:Edison.su@citrix.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 9:26 AM
>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first
>> round
>>
>> +1, we are finally there!
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Oct 10, 2012, at 6:21 PM, "Chip Childers (ASF)"
>><ch...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi All,
>> >
>> > I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating)
>> > Release 4.0.0-incubating.
>> >
>> > Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found
>>here:
>> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.
>> > 0+test+procedure
>> >
>> > We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
>> > artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
>> > release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so
>> > please give it a shot!
>> >
>> >
>> > The following artifacts are up for the vote:
>> > http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.
>> > 0-incubating/
>> >
>> > PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
>> > http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
>> >
>> > Git Branch and Commit SH:
>> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;
>> > a
>> > =shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
>> > Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
>> >
>> > List of changes:
>> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;
>> > a
>> > =blob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
>> >
>> >
>> > Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>> >
>> >
>> > For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please
>> > be sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
>> > [ ] +1 approve
>> > [ ] +0 no opinion
>> > [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>> >
>> > Thanks!
>> >
>> > -chip
RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Radhika Puthiyetath <ra...@citrix.com>.
+1
Great work !
-Radhika
-----Original Message-----
From: Kelven Yang [mailto:kelven.yang@citrix.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 9:43 AM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
+1
Kelven
On 10/10/12 9:05 PM, "Prachi Damle" <Pr...@citrix.com> wrote:
>+1 !
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Sateesh Chodapuneedi [mailto:sateesh.chodapuneedi@citrix.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 9:04 PM
>To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first
>round
>
>+1, great start!
>
>Regards,
>Sateesh
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>---
>--------------------------------------------------
>"This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)
>and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Any
>unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If
>you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply
>e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message."
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Edison Su [mailto:Edison.su@citrix.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 9:26 AM
>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first
>> round
>>
>> +1, we are finally there!
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Oct 10, 2012, at 6:21 PM, "Chip Childers (ASF)"
>><ch...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi All,
>> >
>> > I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating)
>> > Release 4.0.0-incubating.
>> >
>> > Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found
>>here:
>> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.
>> > 0+test+procedure
>> >
>> > We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
>> > artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
>> > release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so
>> > please give it a shot!
>> >
>> >
>> > The following artifacts are up for the vote:
>> > http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.
>> > 0-incubating/
>> >
>> > PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
>> > http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
>> >
>> > Git Branch and Commit SH:
>> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;
>> > a
>> > =shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
>> > Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
>> >
>> > List of changes:
>> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;
>> > a
>> > =blob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
>> >
>> >
>> > Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>> >
>> >
>> > For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please
>> > be sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
>> > [ ] +1 approve
>> > [ ] +0 no opinion
>> > [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>> >
>> > Thanks!
>> >
>> > -chip
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com>.
+1
Kelven
On 10/10/12 9:05 PM, "Prachi Damle" <Pr...@citrix.com> wrote:
>+1 !
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Sateesh Chodapuneedi [mailto:sateesh.chodapuneedi@citrix.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 9:04 PM
>To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first
>round
>
>+1, great start!
>
>Regards,
>Sateesh
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>--------------------------------------------------
>"This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and
>may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Any unauthorized
>review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If you are not
>the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and
>destroy all copies of the original message."
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Edison Su [mailto:Edison.su@citrix.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 9:26 AM
>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first
>> round
>>
>> +1, we are finally there!
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Oct 10, 2012, at 6:21 PM, "Chip Childers (ASF)"
>><ch...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi All,
>> >
>> > I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating)
>> > Release 4.0.0-incubating.
>> >
>> > Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found
>>here:
>> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.
>> > 0+test+procedure
>> >
>> > We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
>> > artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
>> > release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
>> > give it a shot!
>> >
>> >
>> > The following artifacts are up for the vote:
>> > http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.
>> > 0-incubating/
>> >
>> > PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
>> > http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
>> >
>> > Git Branch and Commit SH:
>> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a
>> > =shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
>> > Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
>> >
>> > List of changes:
>> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a
>> > =blob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
>> >
>> >
>> > Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>> >
>> >
>> > For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be
>> > sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
>> > [ ] +1 approve
>> > [ ] +0 no opinion
>> > [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>> >
>> > Thanks!
>> >
>> > -chip
RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Prachi Damle <Pr...@citrix.com>.
+1 !
-----Original Message-----
From: Sateesh Chodapuneedi [mailto:sateesh.chodapuneedi@citrix.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 9:04 PM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
+1, great start!
Regards,
Sateesh
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message."
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Edison Su [mailto:Edison.su@citrix.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 9:26 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first
> round
>
> +1, we are finally there!
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Oct 10, 2012, at 6:21 PM, "Chip Childers (ASF)" <ch...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating)
> > Release 4.0.0-incubating.
> >
> > Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.
> > 0+test+procedure
> >
> > We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
> > artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
> > release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
> > give it a shot!
> >
> >
> > The following artifacts are up for the vote:
> > http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.
> > 0-incubating/
> >
> > PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
> > http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
> >
> > Git Branch and Commit SH:
> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a
> > =shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
> > Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
> >
> > List of changes:
> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a
> > =blob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
> >
> >
> > Vote will be open for 72 hours.
> >
> >
> > For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be
> > sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
> > [ ] +1 approve
> > [ ] +0 no opinion
> > [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > -chip
RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Sateesh Chodapuneedi <sa...@citrix.com>.
+1, great start!
Regards,
Sateesh
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message."
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Edison Su [mailto:Edison.su@citrix.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 9:26 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
>
> +1, we are finally there!
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Oct 10, 2012, at 6:21 PM, "Chip Childers (ASF)" <ch...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release
> > 4.0.0-incubating.
> >
> > Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+test+procedure
> >
> > We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
> > artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
> > release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
> > give it a shot!
> >
> >
> > The following artifacts are up for the vote:
> > http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.0-incubating/
> >
> > PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
> > http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
> >
> > Git Branch and Commit SH:
> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
> > Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
> >
> > List of changes:
> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
> >
> >
> > Vote will be open for 72 hours.
> >
> >
> > For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be
> > sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
> > [ ] +1 approve
> > [ ] +0 no opinion
> > [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > -chip
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Edison Su <Ed...@citrix.com>.
+1, we are finally there!
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 10, 2012, at 6:21 PM, "Chip Childers (ASF)" <ch...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release
> 4.0.0-incubating.
>
> Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+test+procedure
>
> We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
> artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
> give it a shot!
>
>
> The following artifacts are up for the vote:
> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.0-incubating/
>
> PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
>
> Git Branch and Commit SH:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
> Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
>
> List of changes:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
>
>
> Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
>
> For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be
> sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
> [ ] +1 approve
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>
> Thanks!
>
> -chip
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com>.
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 9:21 PM, Chip Childers (ASF)
<ch...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release
> 4.0.0-incubating.
>
> Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+test+procedure
>
> We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
> artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
> give it a shot!
>
>
> The following artifacts are up for the vote:
> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.0-incubating/
>
> PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
>
> Git Branch and Commit SH:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
> Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
>
> List of changes:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
>
>
> Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
>
> For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be
> sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
> [ ] +1 approve
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>
> Thanks!
>
> -chip
Thank you all for your feedback!
We are officially aborting this vote. I'll review the comments, and
open appropriate bugs. We'll regenerate a new release candidate after
the issues have been resolved.
Please checkin all fixes / changes to master, and let me know if you
are ready for a cherry-pick over to 4.0.
-chip
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org>.
Thanks for the response, David!
Looks like you and Chip replied at the same time. I will comment on things
not yet addressed.
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 3:39 PM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>
>
> So effectively we are bundling an upstream library (XenServerJava) in
> its entirety - are you suggesting we should strip the readme and
> license files from that library.
Yep.
>
> >> docs/publican-cloudstack/NOTICE
> >
> > This file should probably not exist.
> >
> > This information should be in the top level NOTICE and LICENSE files.
>
> So I have a question - the notice and license files in
> publican-cloudstack are used in the generation of the
> publican-cloudstack RPM package (see
> docs/publican-cloudstack/publican-cloudstack.spec - including the
> toplevel LICENSE or NOTICE file would contain erroneous information
> for the publican-cloudstack package How do we resolve this so that the
> publican-cloudstack package can contain proper LICENSE/NOTICE
> information for the resulting package? Same issue with Marvin - it
> has it's own LICENSE/NOTICE/README - but its really designed to be
> shipped as a standalone python library when it emerges into 'binary'
> form
Think I covered this obliquely in my last email. If the file is just part
some 3rd party software we have imported, then we need to strip it of these
files and work the important information into our own files.
However, if the files are needed to build some sort of binary package
(because they will be unpacked by the binary package and placed on the
user's system) then I they need to stay where they are. In this instance,
they are not remnants of a code import, but a functional part of the build
system.
I will caveat this by saying that I've actually not run into this before,
so I am trying to apply common sense. (i.e. I am not speaking
authoritatively from policy or anything.)
--
NS
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
Many questions inline.
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 4:46 AM, Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org> wrote:
>> DISCLAIMER
>
> Why is this not picked up by RAT?
I don't know. bug with RAT? What is actionable here for us?
>
>> KEYS
>
> This should not be in the repository.
Where should it be? More explicitly, why shouldn't it be in our git
repo? Where would we place it otherwise? SVN? I went to a number of
git-based TLPs and don't see KEYS there, (and consider this a bug in
incubator docs, as it tells us we need KEYS, points us to a page on
release-signing - but no indication of where KEYS should live - if
you'll tell me I'll add notes to existing incubator documentation)
>
>> awsapi/NOTICE.txt
>> awsapi/README.txt
>
> These files should probably not exist.
>
> This information should be in the top level NOTICE and LICENSE files.
>
Indeed - these are documents for axis2.
Same thing with License.txt
>> debian/changelog
>> debian/README
>
> I am guessing RAT recognises these as files not needing a license.
>
>> deps/XenServerJava/LICENSE.txt
>> deps/XenServerJava/README.txt
>
> These files should probably not exist.
>
> This information should be in the top level NOTICE and LICENSE files.
>
So effectively we are bundling an upstream library (XenServerJava) in
its entirety - are you suggesting we should strip the readme and
license files from that library.
>> docs/publican-cloudstack/NOTICE
>
> This file should probably not exist.
>
> This information should be in the top level NOTICE and LICENSE files.
So I have a question - the notice and license files in
publican-cloudstack are used in the generation of the
publican-cloudstack RPM package (see
docs/publican-cloudstack/publican-cloudstack.spec - including the
toplevel LICENSE or NOTICE file would contain erroneous information
for the publican-cloudstack package How do we resolve this so that the
publican-cloudstack package can contain proper LICENSE/NOTICE
information for the resulting package? Same issue with Marvin - it
has it's own LICENSE/NOTICE/README - but its really designed to be
shipped as a standalone python library when it emerges into 'binary'
form
>
>> patches/systemvm/debian/config/etc/logrotate.conf
>> patches/systemvm/debian/config/etc/logrotate.d/apache2
>> patches/systemvm/debian/config/etc/logrotate.d/dnsmasq
>> patches/systemvm/debian/config/etc/logrotate.d/haproxy
>> patches/systemvm/debian/config/etc/logrotate.d/ppp
>> patches/systemvm/debian/config/etc/logrotate.d/rsyslog
>> patches/systemvm/debian/config/etc/sysctl.conf
>> patches/systemvm/debian/config/opt/cloud/bin/vpc_passwd_server
>> patches/systemvm/debian/config.dat
>
> Why are these files not picked up by RAT?
>
>> patches/systemvm/debian/README
>
> What is this doing here?
>
>> patches/systemvm/debian/vpn/etc/ipsec.conf
>> patches/systemvm/debian/vpn/etc/ipsec.secrets
>> patches/systemvm/debian/vpn/etc/ppp/options.xl2tpd
>> patches/systemvm/debian/vpn/etc/xl2tpd/xl2tpd.conf
>
> Why are these files not picked up by RAT?
>
>> test/conf/README
>> test/integration/component/README
>> test/integration/README
>> test/integration/smoke/README
>> tools/devcloud/veewee/README
>
> Should we have this many README files?
>
> Moving on to a more manual check of the files...
>
> `waf` seems to be some sort of composite binary file. Can we ship this? My
> guess is no.
>
> LICENSE is ISO-8859 encoded. This should be changed to UTF-8 to match our
> other text files.
>
> I then ran this file (based on experimentation with `file` over the source
> tree):
>
> cat > ../okay_file_types.txt << EOF
> ASCII C\+\+ program text
> a python script text executable
> Bourne-Again shell script text executable
> a python script text executable
> ASCII English text
> exported SGML document text
> XML document text
> a bash script text executable
> PNG image data
> ASCII c program text
> SVG Scalable Vector Graphics image
> HTML document text
> POSIX shell script text executable
> PNG image data
> GIF image data
> Lotus 1-2-3
> RFC1421 Security Certificate Signing Request text
> a /usr/bin/make -f script text executable
> ASCII text
> JPEG image data
> UTF-8 Unicode
> Netpbm PBM image text
> a /usr/bin/python script text executable
> ISO-8859 English text
> a /usr/bin/python -u script text executable
> DOS batch file text
> a /usr/bin/python -W ignore::Depr script text executable
> EOF
>
> And then this:
>
> $ find . -type f | xargs file | grep -vEf ../okay_file_types.txt | sed
> 's,:.*,,'
>
> Which gave me this output:
>
> ./awsapi/resource/AmazonEC2/xes.keystore
> ./client/tomcatconf/cloudmanagementserver.keystore
> ./console-proxy/certs/realhostip.keystore
> ./utils/certs/cloud.keystore
>
> These files are binary. Do we need to ship the source?
>
> Then I ran:
>
> $ grep -rsi "copyright" * | grep -v "regarding copyright ownership" | sed
> 's,:, ,' | awk '{print $1}' | sort | uniq > ../files_to_check.txt
>
> I manually reconciled this list with the pom.xml file.
>
>> awsapi/src/com/cloud/bridge/io/DimeDelimitedInputStream.java
>
> This file has two license headers in. One of them is incorrect.
Good catch - top is incorrect - Chip: this likely needs a NOTICE entry as well.
>
>> deps/XenServerJava/BSD
>> deps/XenServerJava/LICENSE.Apache-2.0.txt
>> deps/XenServerJava/LICENSE.txt
>
> These should not be here. They need to be moved to the top level LICENSE.
>
> (And the exclusion in pom.xml needs to be removed.)
>
>> docs/publican-cloudstack/LICENSE
>> docs/publican-cloudstack/NOTICE
>
> These files need to be removed, and merged into the top level LICENSE and
> NOTICE.
See the other publican-cloudstack comments above and let me know how
to resolve it.
>
>> test/integration/component/test_allocation_states.py
>
> This file claims "Copyright 2012 Citrix Systems, Inc." No mention in
> LICENSE.
Already fixed.
>
>> tools/whisker/descriptor.xml
>
> This file has our standard boiler plate, but is crammed full of other
> licenses. Is this okay?
That's as shipped by the Apache RAT (incubating) project.
>
>> ui/lib/excanvas.js
>
> This file claims it is "Copyright 2006 Google Inc.". No mention in LICENSE.
Good catch
Thanks for the review!
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org>.
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 8:42 PM, Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com>wrote:
>
> > Might be good to indicate the provenance of this image on the wiki, and
> > perhaps move it somewhere not on cloud.com, or am I misunderstanding
> what
> > that communicates?
>
> I think moving it's build process to an automated approach, and
> hosting it somewhere on ASF infra is a great step for us to take. I
> tried to get things moving with the infra team on this, but then I got
> distracted doing other things. Perhaps we pick this back up once we
> hear back from the @basho team on their DevCloud build process
> changes?
Okie dokie.
> > I would prefer it if the instructions used Homebrew where possible.
> > MacPorts is kinda lame and I would prefer not to have to install it.
> Having
> > said that, beggars can't be choosers I suppose.
> >
> > As for including them or not, the goal here is to hone this test
> procedure
> > so that people can be as thorough as I am without having to think about
> it.
> > The more we can get to just a list of commands to copy and paste into a
> > terminal, the better. Makes things super easy to follow.
>
> Totally fair to prefer Homebrew. So here's what I'll say... I edited
> the instructions in an attempt to help a Mac user. If you wanted to
> run through the process and modify it to make it (1) more accurate and
> (2) work from Homebrew, that would be awesome. My machine already has
> everything on it, so I was struggling to remember exactly how I got
> things the way they are! I know I should have a better answer than
> that, but it's what I've got.
>
Yep, on it.
> > Okay, thanks. One file will make voting much less... Complicated.
>
> We're going to do 1 file in tar.bz2 format.
Sweet.
> > We need need to be sure our release artefacts are voted on. This isn't
> just
> > about checking boxes so the ASF will leave us alone, it is about ensuring
> > that we are producing the best possible releases for the community.
> (Hint:
> > We are the ASF, so this is a meaningless concept anyway. Though, I must
> > admit, when I was going through incubation I used to think of it in those
> > terms. "Bah, bloody ASF getting in my way again. Then one day, someone
> > kindly pointed out "ASF" included me.)
>
> I didn't imply that ASF if "getting in the way". See my reply to Will
> on how I look at the delegation of authority for podlings, and it's
> implications on what it means to vote.
>
Understood. I think I was just feeling verbose. :)
> I understand the spirit of what you are saying, but I wasn't asking
> for permission. I was asking for input, and John and David gave good
> feedback on the topic.
>
> That... we DO want to develop as a community habit.
Yep, agreed. See above comment. ;)
> > Okay, I just wanted to make sure there's no "source format" we could ship
> > instead.
>
> Nope, those are keys.
Okay.
--
NS
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com>.
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 11:11 AM, Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Chip Childers
> <ch...@sungard.com>wrote:
>
>> The level of detail and attention that you gave this is wonderful. I
>> really want to thank you for this.
>>
>
> No worries! Just doin mah job! ;)
>
>
>> That being said, it's still valid for us to use this as a test target
>> for ease of use.
>>
>
> Yep totally cool with it. Just wanted a bit more visibility.
>
> Might be good to indicate the provenance of this image on the wiki, and
> perhaps move it somewhere not on cloud.com, or am I misunderstanding what
> that communicates?
I think moving it's build process to an automated approach, and
hosting it somewhere on ASF infra is a great step for us to take. I
tried to get things moving with the infra team on this, but then I got
distracted doing other things. Perhaps we pick this back up once we
hear back from the @basho team on their DevCloud build process
changes?
>> Actually, it shouldn't include that line at all. We aren't able to
>> license the whole thing, since it's a full OS! However, this isn't a
>> release artifact, so it can be ignored for the purpose of evaluating
>> the release.
>
>
> Okay.
It should be removed when we get to the automated install / ASF
hosting solution from above.
>> I use OSX - I'll try to edit the instructions with the appropriate Mac
>> Ports packages that are actually needed. I'm going to assume that the
>> user already knows how to use mac ports (there's only so far I'm
>> willing to go with the instructions). Alternatively, I considered
>> just changing that whole section to a list of the packages that the
>> user has to have installed, and assume that they figure it out for
>> their own platform... but I thought better of that. A real example
>> is more useful, and I'm happy to try to remember the steps for Mac for
>> you.
>
>
> I would prefer it if the instructions used Homebrew where possible.
> MacPorts is kinda lame and I would prefer not to have to install it. Having
> said that, beggars can't be choosers I suppose.
>
> As for including them or not, the goal here is to hone this test procedure
> so that people can be as thorough as I am without having to think about it.
> The more we can get to just a list of commands to copy and paste into a
> terminal, the better. Makes things super easy to follow.
Totally fair to prefer Homebrew. So here's what I'll say... I edited
the instructions in an attempt to help a Mac user. If you wanted to
run through the process and modify it to make it (1) more accurate and
(2) work from Homebrew, that would be awesome. My machine already has
everything on it, so I was struggling to remember exactly how I got
things the way they are! I know I should have a better answer than
that, but it's what I've got.
>> Perhaps we don't need the zip format here.
>>
>> I was following examples like:
>> http://maven.apache.org/download.html
>> http://ant.apache.org/srcdownload.cgi
>>
>> However, I see that Hadoop only does tar.gz (well, that, plus RPM and
>> DEB packages, which we're not doing officially via ASF infra).
>>
>> I'll start a thread specifically about this.
>
>
> Okay, thanks. One file will make voting much less... Complicated.
We're going to do 1 file in tar.bz2 format.
>> The `zip` file is 16M, compared to 10M for the `tar.gz` file. Seems odd.
>>
>> It's not odd. They are different compression ratios.
>>
>
> Surprising, then, through my ignorance. These were just "as I went field
> notes". :)
>
>
>> I added instructions explaining that you are looking for no output
>> from the diffs. I'm going to leave the build process as-is for now.
>>
>
> Okay.
>
>
>> > *> Extract the source code and verify the contents: [unzip OR tar
>> command]*
>> >
>> > This is a problem.
>> >
>> > People testing are instructed to only test on artefact. Either we reduce
>> > our artefacts to one instead of two, or people must unpack both and test
>> > both. Or we vote on them both separately. I favour having one artefact.
>>
>> People don't HAVE to do anything really. That being said, I
>> absolutely get the point!
>>
>
> People don't, but WE do.
>
> We need need to be sure our release artefacts are voted on. This isn't just
> about checking boxes so the ASF will leave us alone, it is about ensuring
> that we are producing the best possible releases for the community. (Hint:
> We are the ASF, so this is a meaningless concept anyway. Though, I must
> admit, when I was going through incubation I used to think of it in those
> terms. "Bah, bloody ASF getting in my way again. Then one day, someone
> kindly pointed out "ASF" included me.)
I didn't imply that ASF if "getting in the way". See my reply to Will
on how I look at the delegation of authority for podlings, and it's
implications on what it means to vote.
Like I said, I got your point about the double artifacts. That's changed now.
>
>> We'll probably end up releasing just the tar.gz archive version, but
>> (as I said above) I'll start a different thread to get consensus on
>> this.
>
>
> No need to get consensus on everything. You should feel empowered to just
> do what you think is right. We want to be careful about building a
> permission culture. They are damaging and discourage contributions. When I
> was talking to Prasanna on IRC earlier and he suggested posting to the list
> to suggest what he thought was a good idea, I told him to Just Do It™ and
> wait to see if anybody complained. Be bold. It's easier to ask forgiveness
> than it is to get permission.
>
> That doesn't mean we should never bother talking to people, or discussing
> things. That would be silly. ;) It just means, if something seems
> reasonable to you, and you don't expect anyone to complain, just do it. We
> have lazy consensus and version control to deal with when you make the
> wrong judgement call.
>
> I am sure you don't need me to repeat this, but I thought it was worth
> mentioning anyway. I think it will be important to the health of the
> community if this principal was well understood, for both committers, and
> users alike.
I understand the spirit of what you are saying, but I wasn't asking
for permission. I was asking for input, and John and David gave good
feedback on the topic.
That... we DO want to develop as a community habit.
>> That's not the way we're doing it.
>>
>
> Understood.
>
> Great addition! I skipped this when reviewing the couchdb example,
>> specifically due to the autotools stuff. But I get the point of that
>> step now. I've added it to the instructions. Done!
>>
>
> Sweet.
>
>
>> I don't understand the question. It is. This file is per-ASF
>> guidelines, and RAT knows that a DISCLAIMER file is a NOTICE, and
>> reports it as such. See the output file: target/rat.txt
>>
>
> Understood. I have never used RAT myself, so I am unfamiliar with
> specifics. Thanks for your patience with me! :) As I am sure you are
> wondering, we do our own checking within the CouchDB build. Adding Java as
> a build-time dependancy was not an attractive option for us. ;)
>
>>> KEYS
>> >
>> > This should not be in the repository.
>>
>> Interesting. OK. Where does it normally live?
>>
>
> At the root of your dist dir. Both in your personal space on p.a.o, and our
> dist dir proper.
Fixed. Thanks for the explanation!
> See:
>
> http://www.apache.org/dist/couchdb/
>
> (Archived by infra, so you have nothing to worry about.)
>
>
>> > Why are these files not picked up by RAT?
>>
>> Great catch. That's because some pom.xml fixes didn't get
>> cherry-picked over. I'm looking at that now. The 4.0 branch has
>> "exclude subprojects" set to true, which it should not. It's also
>> missing some exclude directives, that are required once that flag is
>> flipped. I'll get it fixed up.
>>
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>>
>> >> patches/systemvm/debian/README
>> >
>> > What is this doing here?
>>
>> Low level instructions for using the code in that folder. Why is this an
>> issue?
>>
>
> I went through my rationale with Prasanna on IRC.
>
> This isn't with my mentor hat on. I just don't like README files scattered
> around source trees. It's messy, and users very rarely find them. It would
> be my preference to move that information to the wiki, or collect it in a
> README at the root of the tree. (Perhaps using README.foo, and README.bar
> as appropriate.) Exceptions have to be made for files that are required for
> deb/rpm packaging, etc. Again, just a personal preference thing. Ignore me
> at will.
>
>
>> >> test/conf/README
>> >> test/integration/component/README
>> >> test/integration/README
>> >> test/integration/smoke/README
>> >> tools/devcloud/veewee/README
>> >
>> > Should we have this many README files?
>>
>> Prasanna covered this in another email.
>>
>
> Yep, see above explanation, and rationale.
>
>
>>
>> > Moving on to a more manual check of the files...
>> >
>> > `waf` seems to be some sort of composite binary file. Can we ship this?
>> My
>> > guess is no.
>>
>> It's BSD licensed.
>>
>> http://code.google.com/p/waf/
>
>
> But we seem to be shipping a binary? Or is it? The head is source, but the
> rest is binary. Never seen a file like that before. We should only be
> shipping sources. Never compiled software. I am unsure how to categorise
> this, and am looking for guidance.
>
>
>> > LICENSE is ISO-8859 encoded. This should be changed to UTF-8 to match our
>> > other text files.
>>
>> LICENSE is generated by Apache Whisker (using
>> tools/whisker/descriptor.xml as the source). That's the format that
>> it generates the file in apparently.
>>
>
> How annoying, but okay.
>
>
>> Do you happen to know how to convert it? I can do that after
>> regenerating the files next time.
>
>
> Hah. It's in Mac Roman (or MacroMan as I like to call it) because of one
> character: §
>
> This would work:
>
> iconv -f MACROMAN -t UTF-8 LICENSE
>
> This is seriously nitpicky though, and certainly not a release blocker.
> LMAO. :)
>
> Perhaps the problem is in the source configs?
>
>
>> > Which gave me this output:
>> >
>> > ./awsapi/resource/AmazonEC2/xes.keystore
>> > ./client/tomcatconf/cloudmanagementserver.keystore
>> > ./console-proxy/certs/realhostip.keystore
>> > ./utils/certs/cloud.keystore
>> >
>> > These files are binary. Do we need to ship the source?
>>
>> Yes. They are in our RAT exclude list, and are needed for the system
>> to function on initial install. The software provides options for
>> replacing them during a production deployment, but they are needed.
>>
>
> Okay, I just wanted to make sure there's no "source format" we could ship
> instead.
Nope, those are keys.
>
>> Yup - that's the metadata that generates our LICENSE and NOTICE files
>> in the first place!
>
>
> Cool.
>
>
>> > One concern is that even though I got the image to boot, I could not
>> access
>> > it via localhost:8080.
>>
>> That's because you didn't build / deploy / start the server! ;-)
>
>
> D'oh! Heh.
>
> --
> NS
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org>.
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Chip Childers
<ch...@sungard.com>wrote:
> The level of detail and attention that you gave this is wonderful. I
> really want to thank you for this.
>
No worries! Just doin mah job! ;)
> That being said, it's still valid for us to use this as a test target
> for ease of use.
>
Yep totally cool with it. Just wanted a bit more visibility.
Might be good to indicate the provenance of this image on the wiki, and
perhaps move it somewhere not on cloud.com, or am I misunderstanding what
that communicates?
> Actually, it shouldn't include that line at all. We aren't able to
> license the whole thing, since it's a full OS! However, this isn't a
> release artifact, so it can be ignored for the purpose of evaluating
> the release.
Okay.
> I use OSX - I'll try to edit the instructions with the appropriate Mac
> Ports packages that are actually needed. I'm going to assume that the
> user already knows how to use mac ports (there's only so far I'm
> willing to go with the instructions). Alternatively, I considered
> just changing that whole section to a list of the packages that the
> user has to have installed, and assume that they figure it out for
> their own platform... but I thought better of that. A real example
> is more useful, and I'm happy to try to remember the steps for Mac for
> you.
I would prefer it if the instructions used Homebrew where possible.
MacPorts is kinda lame and I would prefer not to have to install it. Having
said that, beggars can't be choosers I suppose.
As for including them or not, the goal here is to hone this test procedure
so that people can be as thorough as I am without having to think about it.
The more we can get to just a list of commands to copy and paste into a
terminal, the better. Makes things super easy to follow.
> Perhaps we don't need the zip format here.
>
> I was following examples like:
> http://maven.apache.org/download.html
> http://ant.apache.org/srcdownload.cgi
>
> However, I see that Hadoop only does tar.gz (well, that, plus RPM and
> DEB packages, which we're not doing officially via ASF infra).
>
> I'll start a thread specifically about this.
Okay, thanks. One file will make voting much less... Complicated.
> The `zip` file is 16M, compared to 10M for the `tar.gz` file. Seems odd.
>
> It's not odd. They are different compression ratios.
>
Surprising, then, through my ignorance. These were just "as I went field
notes". :)
> I added instructions explaining that you are looking for no output
> from the diffs. I'm going to leave the build process as-is for now.
>
Okay.
> > *> Extract the source code and verify the contents: [unzip OR tar
> command]*
> >
> > This is a problem.
> >
> > People testing are instructed to only test on artefact. Either we reduce
> > our artefacts to one instead of two, or people must unpack both and test
> > both. Or we vote on them both separately. I favour having one artefact.
>
> People don't HAVE to do anything really. That being said, I
> absolutely get the point!
>
People don't, but WE do.
We need need to be sure our release artefacts are voted on. This isn't just
about checking boxes so the ASF will leave us alone, it is about ensuring
that we are producing the best possible releases for the community. (Hint:
We are the ASF, so this is a meaningless concept anyway. Though, I must
admit, when I was going through incubation I used to think of it in those
terms. "Bah, bloody ASF getting in my way again. Then one day, someone
kindly pointed out "ASF" included me.)
> We'll probably end up releasing just the tar.gz archive version, but
> (as I said above) I'll start a different thread to get consensus on
> this.
No need to get consensus on everything. You should feel empowered to just
do what you think is right. We want to be careful about building a
permission culture. They are damaging and discourage contributions. When I
was talking to Prasanna on IRC earlier and he suggested posting to the list
to suggest what he thought was a good idea, I told him to Just Do It™ and
wait to see if anybody complained. Be bold. It's easier to ask forgiveness
than it is to get permission.
That doesn't mean we should never bother talking to people, or discussing
things. That would be silly. ;) It just means, if something seems
reasonable to you, and you don't expect anyone to complain, just do it. We
have lazy consensus and version control to deal with when you make the
wrong judgement call.
I am sure you don't need me to repeat this, but I thought it was worth
mentioning anyway. I think it will be important to the health of the
community if this principal was well understood, for both committers, and
users alike.
> That's not the way we're doing it.
>
Understood.
Great addition! I skipped this when reviewing the couchdb example,
> specifically due to the autotools stuff. But I get the point of that
> step now. I've added it to the instructions. Done!
>
Sweet.
> I don't understand the question. It is. This file is per-ASF
> guidelines, and RAT knows that a DISCLAIMER file is a NOTICE, and
> reports it as such. See the output file: target/rat.txt
>
Understood. I have never used RAT myself, so I am unfamiliar with
specifics. Thanks for your patience with me! :) As I am sure you are
wondering, we do our own checking within the CouchDB build. Adding Java as
a build-time dependancy was not an attractive option for us. ;)
>> KEYS
> >
> > This should not be in the repository.
>
> Interesting. OK. Where does it normally live?
>
At the root of your dist dir. Both in your personal space on p.a.o, and our
dist dir proper.
See:
http://www.apache.org/dist/couchdb/
(Archived by infra, so you have nothing to worry about.)
> > Why are these files not picked up by RAT?
>
> Great catch. That's because some pom.xml fixes didn't get
> cherry-picked over. I'm looking at that now. The 4.0 branch has
> "exclude subprojects" set to true, which it should not. It's also
> missing some exclude directives, that are required once that flag is
> flipped. I'll get it fixed up.
>
Thanks!
>
> >> patches/systemvm/debian/README
> >
> > What is this doing here?
>
> Low level instructions for using the code in that folder. Why is this an
> issue?
>
I went through my rationale with Prasanna on IRC.
This isn't with my mentor hat on. I just don't like README files scattered
around source trees. It's messy, and users very rarely find them. It would
be my preference to move that information to the wiki, or collect it in a
README at the root of the tree. (Perhaps using README.foo, and README.bar
as appropriate.) Exceptions have to be made for files that are required for
deb/rpm packaging, etc. Again, just a personal preference thing. Ignore me
at will.
> >> test/conf/README
> >> test/integration/component/README
> >> test/integration/README
> >> test/integration/smoke/README
> >> tools/devcloud/veewee/README
> >
> > Should we have this many README files?
>
> Prasanna covered this in another email.
>
Yep, see above explanation, and rationale.
>
> > Moving on to a more manual check of the files...
> >
> > `waf` seems to be some sort of composite binary file. Can we ship this?
> My
> > guess is no.
>
> It's BSD licensed.
>
> http://code.google.com/p/waf/
But we seem to be shipping a binary? Or is it? The head is source, but the
rest is binary. Never seen a file like that before. We should only be
shipping sources. Never compiled software. I am unsure how to categorise
this, and am looking for guidance.
> > LICENSE is ISO-8859 encoded. This should be changed to UTF-8 to match our
> > other text files.
>
> LICENSE is generated by Apache Whisker (using
> tools/whisker/descriptor.xml as the source). That's the format that
> it generates the file in apparently.
>
How annoying, but okay.
> Do you happen to know how to convert it? I can do that after
> regenerating the files next time.
Hah. It's in Mac Roman (or MacroMan as I like to call it) because of one
character: §
This would work:
iconv -f MACROMAN -t UTF-8 LICENSE
This is seriously nitpicky though, and certainly not a release blocker.
LMAO. :)
Perhaps the problem is in the source configs?
> > Which gave me this output:
> >
> > ./awsapi/resource/AmazonEC2/xes.keystore
> > ./client/tomcatconf/cloudmanagementserver.keystore
> > ./console-proxy/certs/realhostip.keystore
> > ./utils/certs/cloud.keystore
> >
> > These files are binary. Do we need to ship the source?
>
> Yes. They are in our RAT exclude list, and are needed for the system
> to function on initial install. The software provides options for
> replacing them during a production deployment, but they are needed.
>
Okay, I just wanted to make sure there's no "source format" we could ship
instead.
Yup - that's the metadata that generates our LICENSE and NOTICE files
> in the first place!
Cool.
> > One concern is that even though I got the image to boot, I could not
> access
> > it via localhost:8080.
>
> That's because you didn't build / deploy / start the server! ;-)
D'oh! Heh.
--
NS
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com>.
Noah,
The level of detail and attention that you gave this is wonderful. I
really want to thank you for this.
Comments inline:
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 4:46 AM, Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org> wrote:
> Okay, stepping through the test procedure.
> *
> *
> *> Download DevCloud image from
> http://download.cloud.com/templates/devcloud/DevCloud.ova into your machine.
> *
>
> We should add a warning that this is a 1.5GB image!
Done!
>
> Who maintains this? Who WILL maintain this?
The current image we are pointing people to was created by Edison
(IIRC, manually).
We are working on tools to automatically generate the image in
tools/devcloud/*. This includes a Veewee install config, Vagrant
configs and puppet configs. The community (specifically folks from
@basho.com) are working to make this all cleaner right now, by
building off the work that Edison, myself and others (Adam /
Sebastian) started.
That being said, it's still valid for us to use this as a test target
for ease of use.
> *> Open VirtualBox, File->Import Appliance->choose DevCloud.ova*
>
> The license screen lists the license terms as:
>
> "*Apache License 2.0*"
Actually, it shouldn't include that line at all. We aren't able to
license the whole thing, since it's a full OS! However, this isn't a
release artifact, so it can be ignored for the purpose of evaluating
the release.
> That's it. Should this include the license text instead?
>
> *> Install your required development tools (if not already available)*
>
> Where? On my local machine? Or into the running DevCloud image?
>
> I am assuming my local machine for now.
>
> *> sudo aptitude install openjdk-6-jdk ant*
>
> I've Googled around, and I can't find any obvious way to install this on OS
> X 10.8. I found a link to the official Java SE 6 JDK, but I don't know
> enough about Java to know whether this would be fine, or whether I need the
> OpenJDK.
For Mac, you can skip that.
> Looking at the rest of the instructions, I think I'm going to have a hard
> time installing all this without some guidance.
>
> Is there anyone on the ML who has this set up on OS X 10.8? Can you add
> instructions for getting set up?
I use OSX - I'll try to edit the instructions with the appropriate Mac
Ports packages that are actually needed. I'm going to assume that the
user already knows how to use mac ports (there's only so far I'm
willing to go with the instructions). Alternatively, I considered
just changing that whole section to a list of the packages that the
user has to have installed, and assume that they figure it out for
their own platform... but I thought better of that. A real example
is more useful, and I'm happy to try to remember the steps for Mac for
you.
> Skipping this section because I cannot complete it without further
> instruction.
>
> *> mkdir -p ~/cloudstack; cd ~/cloudstack*
>
> I would use something under /tmp for safety.
Done!
> I would also include a step to blow away any previous dir. (You'd be
> surprised how often people will just try to do a second round of voting
> from the same dir, and files get mixed up and confused.)
Done!
> *> Download the artifacts:*
>
> We are exporting a `zip` file and a `tar.gz` file. Which means we have have
> two source artefacts to vote on. I've not encountered this before. I think
> this means that I have to test both of them separately, which is a burden.
> Can we just pick one archive format and vote on that? Realistically, who is
> going to be installing from source anyway? Do we really need the `zip`
> format here?
Perhaps we don't need the zip format here.
I was following examples like:
http://maven.apache.org/download.html
http://ant.apache.org/srcdownload.cgi
However, I see that Hadoop only does tar.gz (well, that, plus RPM and
DEB packages, which we're not doing officially via ASF infra).
I'll start a thread specifically about this.
> The `zip` file is 16M, compared to 10M for the `tar.gz` file. Seems odd.
It's not odd. They are different compression ratios.
> *> Import keys: *
>
> We should mention that the user import from the KEYS file first, and
> suggest importing from a public key server second.
Done.
> *> gpg --verify apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.tar.gz.asc*
>
> Good sig.
>
> (We perhaps need to indicate what output people are looking for here. This
> is a crucial step.)
>
> *> gpg --verify apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.zip.asc*
>
> Good sig.
>
> (We perhaps need to indicate what output people are looking for here. This
> is a crucial step.)
>
> *> gpg --print-md MD5 apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.tar.gz | diff
> - apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.tar.gz.md5*
> *> gpg --print-md MD5 apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.zip | diff -
> apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.zip.md5*
> *> gpg --print-md SHA512 apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.tar.gz |
> diff - apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.tar.gz.sha*
> *> gpg --print-md SHA512 apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.zip | diff
> - apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.zip.sha*
>
> No output. With my user hat on, I don't know whether this was successful or
> not.
>
> `md5sum` and `sha1sum` might be simpler ways of verifying the hashes, but
> this would require the hashes to be generated with these tools as well.
>
> Consider this example:
>
> $ md5sum apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.tar.gz >
> apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.tar.gz.md5.example
> $ md5sum --check apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.tar.gz.md5.example
> apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.tar.gz: OK
I added instructions explaining that you are looking for no output
from the diffs. I'm going to leave the build process as-is for now.
> *> Extract the source code and verify the contents: [unzip OR tar command]*
>
> This is a problem.
>
> People testing are instructed to only test on artefact. Either we reduce
> our artefacts to one instead of two, or people must unpack both and test
> both. Or we vote on them both separately. I favour having one artefact.
People don't HAVE to do anything really. That being said, I
absolutely get the point!
We'll probably end up releasing just the tar.gz archive version, but
(as I said above) I'll start a different thread to get consensus on
this.
> At this point I made two directories, and ran my tests in parallel on both
> artefacts.
>
> I also ran this:
>
> $ diff -r tar/apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src
> zip/apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src
>
> No output, so we're good there. That 6M difference must be compression
> efficiency(!)
>
> I also ran these commands:
>
> $ mkdir git
> $ mkdir tree
> $ git clone https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator-cloudstack.gitgit
> $ cd git
> $ git archive --prefix=../tree/ 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb |
> tar Pxf -
> $ diff -r tar/apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src tree/
> $ diff -r zip/apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src tree/
>
> No output.
>
> Which means that the artefacts do not differ from the tree-ish provided in
> the vote email.
Good!
> On the one hand this is great! But I find it surprising. I was expecting
> there to be a build system that generated files as it prepared the
> artefacts. But I guess I am coming from an Autoconf world, where much of it
> is bootstrapped by the RM at release time.
That's not the way we're doing it.
> Either way, this check should be part of the test procedure. It verifies
> the artefact came from the tree-ish in the email.
Great addition! I skipped this when reviewing the couchdb example,
specifically due to the autotools stuff. But I get the point of that
step now. I've added it to the instructions. Done!
> *> mvn --projects='org.apache.cloudstack:cloudstack'
> org.apache.rat:apache-rat-plugin:0.8:check*
>
> This passes.
>
> But it downloads a LOT of jars. So, of course, I checked every license.
> *grin*
>
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/rat/apache-rat-core/0.8/apache-rat-core-0.8.jar(Apache)
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/commons-collections/commons-collections/3.2/commons-collections-3.2.jar(Apache)
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/commons-lang/commons-lang/2.1/commons-lang-2.1.jar(Apache)
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/commons-io/commons-io/1.4/commons-io-1.4.jar(Apache)
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/commons/commons-compress/1.0/commons-compress-1.0.jar(Apache)
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/commons-cli/commons-cli/1.2/commons-cli-1.2.jar(Apache)
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/codehaus/plexus/plexus-utils/1.4/plexus-utils-1.4.jar(Apache)
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/maven/doxia/doxia-site-renderer/1.0-alpha-8/doxia-site-renderer-1.0-alpha-8.jar(Apache)
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/maven/doxia/doxia-core/1.0-alpha-8/doxia-core-1.0-alpha-8.jar(Apache)
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/maven/doxia/doxia-sink-api/1.0-alpha-8/doxia-sink-api-1.0-alpha-8.jar(Apache)
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/codehaus/plexus/plexus-i18n/1.0-beta-6/plexus-i18n-1.0-beta-6.jar(Apache)
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/codehaus/plexus/plexus-velocity/1.1.3/plexus-velocity-1.1.3.jar(Apache)
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/velocity/velocity/1.4/velocity-1.4.jar(Apache)
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/velocity/velocity-dep/1.4/velocity-dep-1.4.jar(Apache)
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/maven/doxia/doxia-decoration-model/1.0-alpha-8/doxia-decoration-model-1.0-alpha-8.jar(Apache)
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/maven/reporting/maven-reporting-impl/2.0.4/maven-reporting-impl-2.0.4.jar(Apache)
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/commons-validator/commons-validator/1.2.0/commons-validator-1.2.0.jar(Apache)
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/commons-beanutils/commons-beanutils/1.7.0/commons-beanutils-1.7.0.jar(Apache)
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/commons-digester/commons-digester/1.6/commons-digester-1.6.jar(Apache)
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/commons-logging/commons-logging/1.0.4/commons-logging-1.0.4.jar(Apache)
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/xml-apis/xml-apis/1.0.b2/xml-apis-1.0.b2.jar(Apache)
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/oro/oro/2.0.7/oro-2.0.7.jar (Apache)
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/maven/reporting/maven-reporting-api/2.0.4/maven-reporting-api-2.0.4.jar(Apache)
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/maven/shared/maven-plugin-testing-harness/1.1/maven-plugin-testing-harness-1.1.jar(Apache)
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/codehaus/plexus/plexus-interactivity-api/1.0-alpha-4/plexus-interactivity-api-1.0-alpha-4.jar
> (Apache)
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/codehaus/plexus/plexus-archiver/1.0-alpha-7/plexus-archiver-1.0-alpha-7.jar(Apache)
>
> All of them, as far as I can tell, are available under the Apache License.
>
> I then ran:
>
> $ cat pom.xml | grep '<exclude>' | sed 's,.*<exclude>,^,' | sed
> 's,</exclude>,,' | sed 's,\*\*/\*,.*,' | sed 's,\*\*,.*,g' | sed
> 's,/\*,/.*,' > ../license.skip
>
> $ grep -rL 'http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0' * | grep -vEf
> ../license.skip
>
> This produced a lot of files, so I filtered them by removing images.
>
> I got the following list, with comments inline:
>
>> DISCLAIMER
>
> Why is this not picked up by RAT?
I don't understand the question. It is. This file is per-ASF
guidelines, and RAT knows that a DISCLAIMER file is a NOTICE, and
reports it as such. See the output file: target/rat.txt
>> KEYS
>
> This should not be in the repository.
Interesting. OK. Where does it normally live?
>> awsapi/NOTICE.txt
>> awsapi/README.txt
>
> These files should probably not exist.
>
> This information should be in the top level NOTICE and LICENSE files.
It's already there, but the files should have been purged. Thanks!
CLOUDSTACK-326
>> debian/changelog
>> debian/README
>
> I am guessing RAT recognises these as files not needing a license.
You can check that by reviewing target/rat.txt, but yes... it
understands that they are notice files.
>> deps/XenServerJava/LICENSE.txt
>> deps/XenServerJava/README.txt
>
> These files should probably not exist.
CLOUDSTACK-326
> This information should be in the top level NOTICE and LICENSE files.
Already there.
>> docs/publican-cloudstack/NOTICE
>
> This file should probably not exist.
>
> This information should be in the top level NOTICE and LICENSE files.
CLOUDSTACK-326
Plus, I found a stray LICENSE in that same folder.
>> patches/systemvm/debian/config/etc/logrotate.conf
>> patches/systemvm/debian/config/etc/logrotate.d/apache2
>> patches/systemvm/debian/config/etc/logrotate.d/dnsmasq
>> patches/systemvm/debian/config/etc/logrotate.d/haproxy
>> patches/systemvm/debian/config/etc/logrotate.d/ppp
>> patches/systemvm/debian/config/etc/logrotate.d/rsyslog
>> patches/systemvm/debian/config/etc/sysctl.conf
>> patches/systemvm/debian/config/opt/cloud/bin/vpc_passwd_server
>> patches/systemvm/debian/config.dat
>
> Why are these files not picked up by RAT?
Great catch. That's because some pom.xml fixes didn't get
cherry-picked over. I'm looking at that now. The 4.0 branch has
"exclude subprojects" set to true, which it should not. It's also
missing some exclude directives, that are required once that flag is
flipped. I'll get it fixed up.
>> patches/systemvm/debian/README
>
> What is this doing here?
Low level instructions for using the code in that folder. Why is this an issue?
>
>> patches/systemvm/debian/vpn/etc/ipsec.conf
>> patches/systemvm/debian/vpn/etc/ipsec.secrets
>> patches/systemvm/debian/vpn/etc/ppp/options.xl2tpd
>> patches/systemvm/debian/vpn/etc/xl2tpd/xl2tpd.conf
>
> Why are these files not picked up by RAT?
Same issue as above (the pom.xml misconfiguration in 4.0).
>
>> test/conf/README
>> test/integration/component/README
>> test/integration/README
>> test/integration/smoke/README
>> tools/devcloud/veewee/README
>
> Should we have this many README files?
Prasanna covered this in another email.
> Moving on to a more manual check of the files...
>
> `waf` seems to be some sort of composite binary file. Can we ship this? My
> guess is no.
It's BSD licensed.
http://code.google.com/p/waf/
> LICENSE is ISO-8859 encoded. This should be changed to UTF-8 to match our
> other text files.
LICENSE is generated by Apache Whisker (using
tools/whisker/descriptor.xml as the source). That's the format that
it generates the file in apparently.
Do you happen to know how to convert it? I can do that after
regenerating the files next time.
> I then ran this file (based on experimentation with `file` over the source
> tree):
>
> cat > ../okay_file_types.txt << EOF
> ASCII C\+\+ program text
> a python script text executable
> Bourne-Again shell script text executable
> a python script text executable
> ASCII English text
> exported SGML document text
> XML document text
> a bash script text executable
> PNG image data
> ASCII c program text
> SVG Scalable Vector Graphics image
> HTML document text
> POSIX shell script text executable
> PNG image data
> GIF image data
> Lotus 1-2-3
> RFC1421 Security Certificate Signing Request text
> a /usr/bin/make -f script text executable
> ASCII text
> JPEG image data
> UTF-8 Unicode
> Netpbm PBM image text
> a /usr/bin/python script text executable
> ISO-8859 English text
> a /usr/bin/python -u script text executable
> DOS batch file text
> a /usr/bin/python -W ignore::Depr script text executable
> EOF
>
> And then this:
>
> $ find . -type f | xargs file | grep -vEf ../okay_file_types.txt | sed
> 's,:.*,,'
>
> Which gave me this output:
>
> ./awsapi/resource/AmazonEC2/xes.keystore
> ./client/tomcatconf/cloudmanagementserver.keystore
> ./console-proxy/certs/realhostip.keystore
> ./utils/certs/cloud.keystore
>
> These files are binary. Do we need to ship the source?
Yes. They are in our RAT exclude list, and are needed for the system
to function on initial install. The software provides options for
replacing them during a production deployment, but they are needed.
> Then I ran:
>
> $ grep -rsi "copyright" * | grep -v "regarding copyright ownership" | sed
> 's,:, ,' | awk '{print $1}' | sort | uniq > ../files_to_check.txt
>
> I manually reconciled this list with the pom.xml file.
>
>> awsapi/src/com/cloud/bridge/io/DimeDelimitedInputStream.java
>
> This file has two license headers in. One of them is incorrect.
CLOUDSTACK-327 - good find
>> deps/XenServerJava/BSD
>> deps/XenServerJava/LICENSE.Apache-2.0.txt
>> deps/XenServerJava/LICENSE.txt
>
> These should not be here. They need to be moved to the top level LICENSE.
>
> (And the exclusion in pom.xml needs to be removed.)
Added to CLOUDSTACK-326
>
>> docs/publican-cloudstack/LICENSE
>> docs/publican-cloudstack/NOTICE
>
> These files need to be removed, and merged into the top level LICENSE and
> NOTICE.
You already covered these files.
>> plugins/network-elements/nicira-nvp/README.NiciraIntegration
>
> Seems like an odd file.
>
> It has our standard header, but also a separate copyright statement. Which
> is it?
>
> The file is not mentioned in LICENSE.
It was developed as ASF. We need to simply clean it up. I think
there was just confusion about what was appropriate way back then...
Added to CLOUDSTACK-326
>> scripts/vm/hypervisor/xenserver/xcposs/NFSSR.py
>> scripts/vm/hypervisor/xenserver/xcpserver/NFSSR.py
>> scripts/vm/hypervisor/xenserver/xenserver56/NFSSR.py
>> scripts/vm/hypervisor/xenserver/xenserver56fp1/NFSSR.py
>> scripts/vm/hypervisor/xenserver/xenserver60/NFSSR.py
>
> These files have our standard boilerplate, but claim they are "(C) 2008
> Citrix Systems Inc".
Added to CLOUDSTACK-327
>> test/integration/component/test_allocation_states.py
>
> This file claims "Copyright 2012 Citrix Systems, Inc." No mention in
> LICENSE.
Already resolved (will be in the next RC).
>> tools/whisker/descriptor.xml
>
> This file has our standard boiler plate, but is crammed full of other
> licenses. Is this okay?
Yup - that's the metadata that generates our LICENSE and NOTICE files
in the first place!
>> ui/lib/excanvas.js
>
> This file claims it is "Copyright 2006 Google Inc.". No mention in LICENSE.
Great find. CLOUDSTACK-327
> Okay, back to the test procedure instructions...
>
> *> Compile*
>
> Section skipped because I cannot able to set up my build environment
> without further instruction.
>
> I am unable to complete the rest of the testing procedure for the same
> reason.
>
> One concern is that even though I got the image to boot, I could not access
> it via localhost:8080.
That's because you didn't build / deploy / start the server! ;-)
> That's it for now! :-)
>
> --
> NS
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Prasanna Santhanam <pr...@citrix.com>.
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 05:08:27PM +0530, Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
> > > test/conf/README
> > > test/integration/component/README
> > > test/integration/README
> > > test/integration/smoke/README
> > > tools/devcloud/veewee/README
> >
> > Should we have this many README files?
> Fixed to a single README in README.tools.md
>
> > > test/integration/component/test_allocation_states.py
> >
> > This file claims "Copyright 2012 Citrix Systems, Inc." No mention in
> > LICENSE.
>
> David fixed this in
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-314 and this will go
> into the artifact coming up for the next round of voting. Chip
> mentioned this in an earlier email.
>
> I've also moved all the following READMEs into a single top-level
> README.tools.md (markdown enabled). This should make it easier for a
> newcomer to understand the various directories and helper tools in the
> source tarball hopefully.
>
> Chip - I've committed this change to master with commit -
>
> commit c86c5d2cc042e5b61879ede43e91d53ab75bc2c2
> Author: Prasanna Santhanam <ts...@apache.org>
> Date: Fri Oct 12 17:01:20 2012 +0530
>
> Uniting all the READMEs from tools and test
>
> If this seems wise you may cherry-pick into 4.0 for the next artifact
> up for vote.
>
> Thanks,
>
Note: I've not moved the READMEs within debian and patches/../debian since
those are necessary for packagers for specific instructions.
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Prasanna Santhanam <pr...@citrix.com>.
> > test/conf/README
> > test/integration/component/README
> > test/integration/README
> > test/integration/smoke/README
> > tools/devcloud/veewee/README
>
> Should we have this many README files?
Fixed to a single README in README.tools.md
> > test/integration/component/test_allocation_states.py
>
> This file claims "Copyright 2012 Citrix Systems, Inc." No mention in
> LICENSE.
David fixed this in
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-314 and this will go
into the artifact coming up for the next round of voting. Chip
mentioned this in an earlier email.
I've also moved all the following READMEs into a single top-level
README.tools.md (markdown enabled). This should make it easier for a
newcomer to understand the various directories and helper tools in the
source tarball hopefully.
Chip - I've committed this change to master with commit -
commit c86c5d2cc042e5b61879ede43e91d53ab75bc2c2
Author: Prasanna Santhanam <ts...@apache.org>
Date: Fri Oct 12 17:01:20 2012 +0530
Uniting all the READMEs from tools and test
If this seems wise you may cherry-pick into 4.0 for the next artifact
up for vote.
Thanks,
--
Prasanna.,
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org>.
Okay, stepping through the test procedure.
*
*
*> Download DevCloud image from
http://download.cloud.com/templates/devcloud/DevCloud.ova into your machine.
*
We should add a warning that this is a 1.5GB image!
Who maintains this? Who WILL maintain this?
*> Open VirtualBox, File->Import Appliance->choose DevCloud.ova*
The license screen lists the license terms as:
"*Apache License 2.0*"
That's it. Should this include the license text instead?
*> Install your required development tools (if not already available)*
Where? On my local machine? Or into the running DevCloud image?
I am assuming my local machine for now.
*> sudo aptitude install openjdk-6-jdk ant*
I've Googled around, and I can't find any obvious way to install this on OS
X 10.8. I found a link to the official Java SE 6 JDK, but I don't know
enough about Java to know whether this would be fine, or whether I need the
OpenJDK.
Looking at the rest of the instructions, I think I'm going to have a hard
time installing all this without some guidance.
Is there anyone on the ML who has this set up on OS X 10.8? Can you add
instructions for getting set up?
Skipping this section because I cannot complete it without further
instruction.
*> mkdir -p ~/cloudstack; cd ~/cloudstack*
I would use something under /tmp for safety.
I would also include a step to blow away any previous dir. (You'd be
surprised how often people will just try to do a second round of voting
from the same dir, and files get mixed up and confused.)
*> Download the artifacts:*
We are exporting a `zip` file and a `tar.gz` file. Which means we have have
two source artefacts to vote on. I've not encountered this before. I think
this means that I have to test both of them separately, which is a burden.
Can we just pick one archive format and vote on that? Realistically, who is
going to be installing from source anyway? Do we really need the `zip`
format here?
The `zip` file is 16M, compared to 10M for the `tar.gz` file. Seems odd.
*> Import keys: *
We should mention that the user import from the KEYS file first, and
suggest importing from a public key server second.
*> gpg --verify apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.tar.gz.asc*
Good sig.
(We perhaps need to indicate what output people are looking for here. This
is a crucial step.)
*> gpg --verify apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.zip.asc*
Good sig.
(We perhaps need to indicate what output people are looking for here. This
is a crucial step.)
*> gpg --print-md MD5 apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.tar.gz | diff
- apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.tar.gz.md5*
*> gpg --print-md MD5 apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.zip | diff -
apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.zip.md5*
*> gpg --print-md SHA512 apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.tar.gz |
diff - apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.tar.gz.sha*
*> gpg --print-md SHA512 apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.zip | diff
- apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.zip.sha*
No output. With my user hat on, I don't know whether this was successful or
not.
`md5sum` and `sha1sum` might be simpler ways of verifying the hashes, but
this would require the hashes to be generated with these tools as well.
Consider this example:
$ md5sum apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.tar.gz >
apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.tar.gz.md5.example
$ md5sum --check apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.tar.gz.md5.example
apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src.tar.gz: OK
*> Extract the source code and verify the contents: [unzip OR tar command]*
This is a problem.
People testing are instructed to only test on artefact. Either we reduce
our artefacts to one instead of two, or people must unpack both and test
both. Or we vote on them both separately. I favour having one artefact.
At this point I made two directories, and ran my tests in parallel on both
artefacts.
I also ran this:
$ diff -r tar/apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src
zip/apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src
No output, so we're good there. That 6M difference must be compression
efficiency(!)
I also ran these commands:
$ mkdir git
$ mkdir tree
$ git clone https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator-cloudstack.gitgit
$ cd git
$ git archive --prefix=../tree/ 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb |
tar Pxf -
$ diff -r tar/apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src tree/
$ diff -r zip/apache-cloudstack-4.0.0-incubating-src tree/
No output.
Which means that the artefacts do not differ from the tree-ish provided in
the vote email.
On the one hand this is great! But I find it surprising. I was expecting
there to be a build system that generated files as it prepared the
artefacts. But I guess I am coming from an Autoconf world, where much of it
is bootstrapped by the RM at release time.
Either way, this check should be part of the test procedure. It verifies
the artefact came from the tree-ish in the email.
*> mvn --projects='org.apache.cloudstack:cloudstack'
org.apache.rat:apache-rat-plugin:0.8:check*
This passes.
But it downloads a LOT of jars. So, of course, I checked every license.
*grin*
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/rat/apache-rat-core/0.8/apache-rat-core-0.8.jar(Apache)
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/commons-collections/commons-collections/3.2/commons-collections-3.2.jar(Apache)
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/commons-lang/commons-lang/2.1/commons-lang-2.1.jar(Apache)
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/commons-io/commons-io/1.4/commons-io-1.4.jar(Apache)
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/commons/commons-compress/1.0/commons-compress-1.0.jar(Apache)
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/commons-cli/commons-cli/1.2/commons-cli-1.2.jar(Apache)
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/codehaus/plexus/plexus-utils/1.4/plexus-utils-1.4.jar(Apache)
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/maven/doxia/doxia-site-renderer/1.0-alpha-8/doxia-site-renderer-1.0-alpha-8.jar(Apache)
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/maven/doxia/doxia-core/1.0-alpha-8/doxia-core-1.0-alpha-8.jar(Apache)
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/maven/doxia/doxia-sink-api/1.0-alpha-8/doxia-sink-api-1.0-alpha-8.jar(Apache)
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/codehaus/plexus/plexus-i18n/1.0-beta-6/plexus-i18n-1.0-beta-6.jar(Apache)
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/codehaus/plexus/plexus-velocity/1.1.3/plexus-velocity-1.1.3.jar(Apache)
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/velocity/velocity/1.4/velocity-1.4.jar(Apache)
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/velocity/velocity-dep/1.4/velocity-dep-1.4.jar(Apache)
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/maven/doxia/doxia-decoration-model/1.0-alpha-8/doxia-decoration-model-1.0-alpha-8.jar(Apache)
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/maven/reporting/maven-reporting-impl/2.0.4/maven-reporting-impl-2.0.4.jar(Apache)
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/commons-validator/commons-validator/1.2.0/commons-validator-1.2.0.jar(Apache)
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/commons-beanutils/commons-beanutils/1.7.0/commons-beanutils-1.7.0.jar(Apache)
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/commons-digester/commons-digester/1.6/commons-digester-1.6.jar(Apache)
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/commons-logging/commons-logging/1.0.4/commons-logging-1.0.4.jar(Apache)
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/xml-apis/xml-apis/1.0.b2/xml-apis-1.0.b2.jar(Apache)
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/oro/oro/2.0.7/oro-2.0.7.jar (Apache)
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/maven/reporting/maven-reporting-api/2.0.4/maven-reporting-api-2.0.4.jar(Apache)
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/maven/shared/maven-plugin-testing-harness/1.1/maven-plugin-testing-harness-1.1.jar(Apache)
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/codehaus/plexus/plexus-interactivity-api/1.0-alpha-4/plexus-interactivity-api-1.0-alpha-4.jar
(Apache)
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/codehaus/plexus/plexus-archiver/1.0-alpha-7/plexus-archiver-1.0-alpha-7.jar(Apache)
All of them, as far as I can tell, are available under the Apache License.
I then ran:
$ cat pom.xml | grep '<exclude>' | sed 's,.*<exclude>,^,' | sed
's,</exclude>,,' | sed 's,\*\*/\*,.*,' | sed 's,\*\*,.*,g' | sed
's,/\*,/.*,' > ../license.skip
$ grep -rL 'http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0' * | grep -vEf
../license.skip
This produced a lot of files, so I filtered them by removing images.
I got the following list, with comments inline:
> DISCLAIMER
Why is this not picked up by RAT?
> KEYS
This should not be in the repository.
> awsapi/NOTICE.txt
> awsapi/README.txt
These files should probably not exist.
This information should be in the top level NOTICE and LICENSE files.
> debian/changelog
> debian/README
I am guessing RAT recognises these as files not needing a license.
> deps/XenServerJava/LICENSE.txt
> deps/XenServerJava/README.txt
These files should probably not exist.
This information should be in the top level NOTICE and LICENSE files.
> docs/publican-cloudstack/NOTICE
This file should probably not exist.
This information should be in the top level NOTICE and LICENSE files.
> patches/systemvm/debian/config/etc/logrotate.conf
> patches/systemvm/debian/config/etc/logrotate.d/apache2
> patches/systemvm/debian/config/etc/logrotate.d/dnsmasq
> patches/systemvm/debian/config/etc/logrotate.d/haproxy
> patches/systemvm/debian/config/etc/logrotate.d/ppp
> patches/systemvm/debian/config/etc/logrotate.d/rsyslog
> patches/systemvm/debian/config/etc/sysctl.conf
> patches/systemvm/debian/config/opt/cloud/bin/vpc_passwd_server
> patches/systemvm/debian/config.dat
Why are these files not picked up by RAT?
> patches/systemvm/debian/README
What is this doing here?
> patches/systemvm/debian/vpn/etc/ipsec.conf
> patches/systemvm/debian/vpn/etc/ipsec.secrets
> patches/systemvm/debian/vpn/etc/ppp/options.xl2tpd
> patches/systemvm/debian/vpn/etc/xl2tpd/xl2tpd.conf
Why are these files not picked up by RAT?
> test/conf/README
> test/integration/component/README
> test/integration/README
> test/integration/smoke/README
> tools/devcloud/veewee/README
Should we have this many README files?
Moving on to a more manual check of the files...
`waf` seems to be some sort of composite binary file. Can we ship this? My
guess is no.
LICENSE is ISO-8859 encoded. This should be changed to UTF-8 to match our
other text files.
I then ran this file (based on experimentation with `file` over the source
tree):
cat > ../okay_file_types.txt << EOF
ASCII C\+\+ program text
a python script text executable
Bourne-Again shell script text executable
a python script text executable
ASCII English text
exported SGML document text
XML document text
a bash script text executable
PNG image data
ASCII c program text
SVG Scalable Vector Graphics image
HTML document text
POSIX shell script text executable
PNG image data
GIF image data
Lotus 1-2-3
RFC1421 Security Certificate Signing Request text
a /usr/bin/make -f script text executable
ASCII text
JPEG image data
UTF-8 Unicode
Netpbm PBM image text
a /usr/bin/python script text executable
ISO-8859 English text
a /usr/bin/python -u script text executable
DOS batch file text
a /usr/bin/python -W ignore::Depr script text executable
EOF
And then this:
$ find . -type f | xargs file | grep -vEf ../okay_file_types.txt | sed
's,:.*,,'
Which gave me this output:
./awsapi/resource/AmazonEC2/xes.keystore
./client/tomcatconf/cloudmanagementserver.keystore
./console-proxy/certs/realhostip.keystore
./utils/certs/cloud.keystore
These files are binary. Do we need to ship the source?
Then I ran:
$ grep -rsi "copyright" * | grep -v "regarding copyright ownership" | sed
's,:, ,' | awk '{print $1}' | sort | uniq > ../files_to_check.txt
I manually reconciled this list with the pom.xml file.
> awsapi/src/com/cloud/bridge/io/DimeDelimitedInputStream.java
This file has two license headers in. One of them is incorrect.
> deps/XenServerJava/BSD
> deps/XenServerJava/LICENSE.Apache-2.0.txt
> deps/XenServerJava/LICENSE.txt
These should not be here. They need to be moved to the top level LICENSE.
(And the exclusion in pom.xml needs to be removed.)
> docs/publican-cloudstack/LICENSE
> docs/publican-cloudstack/NOTICE
These files need to be removed, and merged into the top level LICENSE and
NOTICE.
> plugins/network-elements/nicira-nvp/README.NiciraIntegration
Seems like an odd file.
It has our standard header, but also a separate copyright statement. Which
is it?
The file is not mentioned in LICENSE.
> scripts/vm/hypervisor/xenserver/xcposs/NFSSR.py
> scripts/vm/hypervisor/xenserver/xcpserver/NFSSR.py
> scripts/vm/hypervisor/xenserver/xenserver56/NFSSR.py
> scripts/vm/hypervisor/xenserver/xenserver56fp1/NFSSR.py
> scripts/vm/hypervisor/xenserver/xenserver60/NFSSR.py
These files have our standard boilerplate, but claim they are "(C) 2008
Citrix Systems Inc".
> test/integration/component/test_allocation_states.py
This file claims "Copyright 2012 Citrix Systems, Inc." No mention in
LICENSE.
> tools/whisker/descriptor.xml
This file has our standard boiler plate, but is crammed full of other
licenses. Is this okay?
> ui/lib/excanvas.js
This file claims it is "Copyright 2006 Google Inc.". No mention in LICENSE.
Okay, back to the test procedure instructions...
*> Compile*
Section skipped because I cannot able to set up my build environment
without further instruction.
I am unable to complete the rest of the testing procedure for the same
reason.
One concern is that even though I got the image to boot, I could not access
it via localhost:8080.
That's it for now! :-)
--
NS
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by John Kinsella <jl...@stratosec.co>.
+1 (binding)
Completed smoke test last night, will be doing upgrade testing later today.
On Oct 11, 2012, at 2:04 AM, Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org>
wrote:
> Chip,
>
> Thanks for calling the vote! I'll take a look later. :D
>
> Just one quick note. We might want to include a step in the testing
> procedure that asks people to state on the list that they followed the
> tests, and that they were successful. I have found in the past that people
> are often happy to +1 a release without testing it, which defeats the
> purpose of the vote. Asking for an explicit acknowledgement increases
> testing.
>
> If there's anyone reading this who already voted +1, indicating how far
> through the test procedure you got would be handy!
>
> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 2:21 AM, Chip Childers (ASF) <
> chipchilders@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release
>> 4.0.0-incubating.
>>
>> Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+test+procedure
>>
>> We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
>> artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
>> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
>> give it a shot!
>>
>>
>> The following artifacts are up for the vote:
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.0-incubating/
>>
>> PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
>> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
>>
>> Git Branch and Commit SH:
>>
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
>> Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
>>
>> List of changes:
>>
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
>>
>>
>> Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>
>>
>> For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be
>> sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
>> [ ] +1 approve
>> [ ] +0 no opinion
>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> -chip
>>
>
>
>
> --
> NS
Stratosec - Secure Infrastructure as a Service
o: 415.315.9385
@johnlkinsella
RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Prashant Kumar Mishra <pr...@citrix.com>.
+1 ,Finally about to cross milestone .
Thanks
Prashant Kumar Mishra
-----Original Message-----
From: Gavin Lee [mailto:gavin.lxh@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 7:52 PM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
+1
worth waiting.
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 9:38 PM, Rohit Yadav <ro...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
> On 11-Oct-2012, at 6:48 PM, Nitin Mehta <Ni...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>> Noah - Agree with you. I think whosoever is voting +1 should explicitly indicate the extent to which they have tested it as well.
>
> Agree.
>
> Pl. follow the following wikis for building and testing:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Building#Buildi
> ng-ApacheCloudStack4.0
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+
> test+procedure
>
> And update them as needed.
>
> Things I tested:
> - building oss/nonoss for ubuntu and rhel works.
> - installation of oss/nonoss for ubuntu and rhel works.
> - upgrades (3.0.2 to 4.0) for rhel and ubuntu on nonoss works.
> - basic building, ant debug, deploydb etc.
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Building#Buildi
> ng-ApacheCloudStack4.0
> - basic zone setup using Xen host
>
> Nonoss patches for 4.0:
> http://bhaisaab.org/patches/cloudstack/0001-BUILD-Make-CloudStack-buil
> dable-with-nonoss-libs.patch
> http://bhaisaab.org/patches/cloudstack/0002-BUILD-nonoss-libs-for-Clou
> dStack.patch
>
> Regards.
>
>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Noah Slater [mailto:nslater@tumbolia.org]
>> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 2:35 PM
>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first
>> round
>>
>> Chip,
>>
>> Thanks for calling the vote! I'll take a look later. :D
>>
>> Just one quick note. We might want to include a step in the testing procedure that asks people to state on the list that they followed the tests, and that they were successful. I have found in the past that people are often happy to +1 a release without testing it, which defeats the purpose of the vote. Asking for an explicit acknowledgement increases testing.
>>
>> If there's anyone reading this who already voted +1, indicating how far through the test procedure you got would be handy!
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 2:21 AM, Chip Childers (ASF) < chipchilders@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating)
>>> Release 4.0.0-incubating.
>>>
>>> Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
>>>
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.
>>> 0+
>>> test+procedure
>>>
>>> We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
>>> artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
>>> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
>>> give it a shot!
>>>
>>>
>>> The following artifacts are up for the vote:
>>>
>>> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.
>>> 0-
>>> incubating/
>>>
>>> PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
>>> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
>>>
>>> Git Branch and Commit SH:
>>>
>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a
>>> =s
>>> hortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
>>> Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
>>>
>>> List of changes:
>>>
>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a
>>> =b
>>> lob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
>>>
>>>
>>> Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>>
>>>
>>> For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be
>>> sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
>>> [ ] +1 approve
>>> [ ] +0 no opinion
>>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> -chip
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> NS
>
--
Gavin
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Gavin Lee <ga...@gmail.com>.
+1
worth waiting.
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 9:38 PM, Rohit Yadav <ro...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
> On 11-Oct-2012, at 6:48 PM, Nitin Mehta <Ni...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>> Noah - Agree with you. I think whosoever is voting +1 should explicitly indicate the extent to which they have tested it as well.
>
> Agree.
>
> Pl. follow the following wikis for building and testing:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Building#Building-ApacheCloudStack4.0
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+test+procedure
>
> And update them as needed.
>
> Things I tested:
> - building oss/nonoss for ubuntu and rhel works.
> - installation of oss/nonoss for ubuntu and rhel works.
> - upgrades (3.0.2 to 4.0) for rhel and ubuntu on nonoss works.
> - basic building, ant debug, deploydb etc. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Building#Building-ApacheCloudStack4.0
> - basic zone setup using Xen host
>
> Nonoss patches for 4.0:
> http://bhaisaab.org/patches/cloudstack/0001-BUILD-Make-CloudStack-buildable-with-nonoss-libs.patch
> http://bhaisaab.org/patches/cloudstack/0002-BUILD-nonoss-libs-for-CloudStack.patch
>
> Regards.
>
>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Noah Slater [mailto:nslater@tumbolia.org]
>> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 2:35 PM
>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
>>
>> Chip,
>>
>> Thanks for calling the vote! I'll take a look later. :D
>>
>> Just one quick note. We might want to include a step in the testing procedure that asks people to state on the list that they followed the tests, and that they were successful. I have found in the past that people are often happy to +1 a release without testing it, which defeats the purpose of the vote. Asking for an explicit acknowledgement increases testing.
>>
>> If there's anyone reading this who already voted +1, indicating how far through the test procedure you got would be handy!
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 2:21 AM, Chip Childers (ASF) < chipchilders@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release
>>> 4.0.0-incubating.
>>>
>>> Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
>>>
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+
>>> test+procedure
>>>
>>> We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
>>> artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
>>> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
>>> give it a shot!
>>>
>>>
>>> The following artifacts are up for the vote:
>>>
>>> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.0-
>>> incubating/
>>>
>>> PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
>>> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
>>>
>>> Git Branch and Commit SH:
>>>
>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=s
>>> hortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
>>> Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
>>>
>>> List of changes:
>>>
>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=b
>>> lob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
>>>
>>>
>>> Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>>
>>>
>>> For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be
>>> sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
>>> [ ] +1 approve
>>> [ ] +0 no opinion
>>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> -chip
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> NS
>
--
Gavin
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Rohit Yadav <ro...@citrix.com>.
On 11-Oct-2012, at 6:48 PM, Nitin Mehta <Ni...@citrix.com> wrote:
> Noah - Agree with you. I think whosoever is voting +1 should explicitly indicate the extent to which they have tested it as well.
Agree.
Pl. follow the following wikis for building and testing:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Building#Building-ApacheCloudStack4.0
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+test+procedure
And update them as needed.
Things I tested:
- building oss/nonoss for ubuntu and rhel works.
- installation of oss/nonoss for ubuntu and rhel works.
- upgrades (3.0.2 to 4.0) for rhel and ubuntu on nonoss works.
- basic building, ant debug, deploydb etc. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Building#Building-ApacheCloudStack4.0
- basic zone setup using Xen host
Nonoss patches for 4.0:
http://bhaisaab.org/patches/cloudstack/0001-BUILD-Make-CloudStack-buildable-with-nonoss-libs.patch
http://bhaisaab.org/patches/cloudstack/0002-BUILD-nonoss-libs-for-CloudStack.patch
Regards.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Noah Slater [mailto:nslater@tumbolia.org]
> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 2:35 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
>
> Chip,
>
> Thanks for calling the vote! I'll take a look later. :D
>
> Just one quick note. We might want to include a step in the testing procedure that asks people to state on the list that they followed the tests, and that they were successful. I have found in the past that people are often happy to +1 a release without testing it, which defeats the purpose of the vote. Asking for an explicit acknowledgement increases testing.
>
> If there's anyone reading this who already voted +1, indicating how far through the test procedure you got would be handy!
>
> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 2:21 AM, Chip Childers (ASF) < chipchilders@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release
>> 4.0.0-incubating.
>>
>> Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+
>> test+procedure
>>
>> We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
>> artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
>> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
>> give it a shot!
>>
>>
>> The following artifacts are up for the vote:
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.0-
>> incubating/
>>
>> PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
>> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
>>
>> Git Branch and Commit SH:
>>
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=s
>> hortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
>> Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
>>
>> List of changes:
>>
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=b
>> lob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
>>
>>
>> Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>
>>
>> For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be
>> sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
>> [ ] +1 approve
>> [ ] +0 no opinion
>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> -chip
>>
>
>
>
> --
> NS
RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Nitin Mehta <Ni...@citrix.com>.
Noah - Agree with you. I think whosoever is voting +1 should explicitly indicate the extent to which they have tested it as well.
-----Original Message-----
From: Noah Slater [mailto:nslater@tumbolia.org]
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 2:35 PM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Chip,
Thanks for calling the vote! I'll take a look later. :D
Just one quick note. We might want to include a step in the testing procedure that asks people to state on the list that they followed the tests, and that they were successful. I have found in the past that people are often happy to +1 a release without testing it, which defeats the purpose of the vote. Asking for an explicit acknowledgement increases testing.
If there's anyone reading this who already voted +1, indicating how far through the test procedure you got would be handy!
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 2:21 AM, Chip Childers (ASF) < chipchilders@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release
> 4.0.0-incubating.
>
> Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+
> test+procedure
>
> We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
> artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
> give it a shot!
>
>
> The following artifacts are up for the vote:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.0-
> incubating/
>
> PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
>
> Git Branch and Commit SH:
>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=s
> hortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
> Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
>
> List of changes:
>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=b
> lob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
>
>
> Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
>
> For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be
> sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
> [ ] +1 approve
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>
> Thanks!
>
> -chip
>
--
NS
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org>.
Chip,
Thanks for calling the vote! I'll take a look later. :D
Just one quick note. We might want to include a step in the testing
procedure that asks people to state on the list that they followed the
tests, and that they were successful. I have found in the past that people
are often happy to +1 a release without testing it, which defeats the
purpose of the vote. Asking for an explicit acknowledgement increases
testing.
If there's anyone reading this who already voted +1, indicating how far
through the test procedure you got would be handy!
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 2:21 AM, Chip Childers (ASF) <
chipchilders@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release
> 4.0.0-incubating.
>
> Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+test+procedure
>
> We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
> artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
> give it a shot!
>
>
> The following artifacts are up for the vote:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.0-incubating/
>
> PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
>
> Git Branch and Commit SH:
>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
> Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
>
> List of changes:
>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
>
>
> Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
>
> For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be
> sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
> [ ] +1 approve
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>
> Thanks!
>
> -chip
>
--
NS
RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Kevin Kluge <Ke...@citrix.com>.
+1 (binding)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: chip.childers@sungard.com [mailto:chip.childers@sungard.com] On
> Behalf Of Chip Childers (ASF)
> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 6:21 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
>
> Hi All,
>
> I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release 4.0.0-
> incubating.
>
> Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+tes
> t+procedure
>
> We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
> artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the release is made.
> Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please give it a shot!
>
>
> The following artifacts are up for the vote:
> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.0-
> incubating/
>
> PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
>
> Git Branch and Commit SH:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-
> cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
> Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
>
> List of changes:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-
> cloudstack.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
>
>
> Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
>
> For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be sure to
> indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
> [ ] +1 approve
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>
> Thanks!
>
> -chip
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com>.
Thanks Sudha! Comments below.
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 11:43 PM, Sudha Ponnaganti
<su...@citrix.com> wrote:
> +1 to create a new RC with the fix. Also pl review if there are any additional fixes that need to go in.
> Before the new RC need to resolve the following defects in my opinion
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-285 - Kelven ??
This seems like a rather old bug. I'm going to suggest that it's
targeted for 4.1.0
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-294 - this is resolved - just need to put it in resolved status
Closed
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-318 - This has been checked and common scenario. Need to understand use case as this is not reproducible
Unless it's reproduced, I think it might be user error or a specific
environment problem. I'm marking it as 4.1.0
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-324 - QA is checking this one
This seems like a rather old bug. I'm going to suggest that it's
targeted for 4.1.0
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-325 - there is a workaround for this one - But see if you can fix it before you cut second RC
4.1.0
>
> QA will validate next RC for sanity validation and will cast vote based on validation. However you can go ahead with outlined plan below.
>
> Thanks
> /Sudha
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.childers@sungard.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 7:45 PM
> To: <cl...@incubator.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
>
> On Oct 11, 2012, at 10:04 PM, Edison Su <Ed...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>> Both of these issues we found today are not blocker and the fixes are trivial.
>> We don't need another round test from QA team: the fix for bug CloudStack-316 is agreed by Wido, Marcus and I, and tested by Wido, another bug fixes are related to legal.
>
> Agreed. If we abort, we can immediately cut another release candidate and start another vote. No need for the test engineers in the community to due a full round of testing prior to seeing a new vote.
>
> I would, however, love any future vote to include test engineers personally voting based on testing the official RC artifacts!
>
>> Seems recasting another round voting is inevitable?
>>
> I'm going to leave this thread open until the morning to gather more opinions and comments. However, I think you are right. In all likelihood, I'll abort tomorrow morning and create a new RC and vote thread.
>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Oct 11, 2012, at 5:47 PM, "Simon Weller" <sw...@ena.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> <On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 7:56 PM, Wido den Hollander <wi...@widodh.nl> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 10/11/2012 03:21 AM, Chip Childers (ASF) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>
>>>>> I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating)
>>>>> Release 4.0.0-incubating.
>>>>>
>>>>> Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4
>>>>> .0+test+procedure
>>>>>
>>>>> We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
>>>>> artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
>>>>> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so
>>>>> please give it a shot!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sorry for stopping the +1 spree, but I'm going to vote -1.
>>>>
>>>> While testing the artifact I ran into CLOUDSTACK-316 (which I created).
>>>>
>>>> QA (nofi) only tested with cloudbr0 in their setup and never tested
>>>> usage with other traffic labels.
>>>>
>>>> After talking with Edison and Marcus we came up with commit
>>>> 513b680d96d07fd44479995ac5eb6358725c9421 which resolves it.
>>>>
>>>> The problem in my setup was that adding the host would fail and
>>>> you'd have to figure out what was going wrong.
>>>>
>>>> I understood what was going wrong, but this would/could scare a new
>>>> user away since a very simple use-case didn't work during the wizard.
>>>>
>>>> So my vote is -1 on this artifact.
>>>>
>>>> Wido
>>>>
>>>> Wido,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the detailed testing.
>>>>
>>>> IMO, I believe we would be best served aborting round 1 and
>>>> regenerating a new release artifact with the fix for your issue. I
>>>> would also include the fixes for at least CLOUDSTACK-314 (Citrix
>>>> license header remains in
>>>> test/integration/component/test_allocation_states.py) and
>>>> CLOUDSTACK-302 (New Features Are Added to ReleaseNotes). Both of
>>>> these are low risk changes, but important documentation and legal
>>>> issues.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not going to abort the vote immediately, but I would like to get
>>>> opinions from other community members on this topic.
>>>>
>>>> -chip
>>>
>>> This is a good catch. We have always used cloudbr0, so we didn't test this in our lab either. This definitely needs to be addressed as it's going to cause lots of pain for new KVM users.
>>>
>>> I'm changing my vote to -1.
>>>
>>> - Si
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>
>
RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Sudha Ponnaganti <su...@citrix.com>.
+1 to create a new RC with the fix. Also pl review if there are any additional fixes that need to go in.
Before the new RC need to resolve the following defects in my opinion
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-285 - Kelven ??
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-294 - this is resolved - just need to put it in resolved status
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-318 - This has been checked and common scenario. Need to understand use case as this is not reproducible
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-324 - QA is checking this one
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-325 - there is a workaround for this one - But see if you can fix it before you cut second RC
QA will validate next RC for sanity validation and will cast vote based on validation. However you can go ahead with outlined plan below.
Thanks
/Sudha
-----Original Message-----
From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.childers@sungard.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 7:45 PM
To: <cl...@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
On Oct 11, 2012, at 10:04 PM, Edison Su <Ed...@citrix.com> wrote:
> Both of these issues we found today are not blocker and the fixes are trivial.
> We don't need another round test from QA team: the fix for bug CloudStack-316 is agreed by Wido, Marcus and I, and tested by Wido, another bug fixes are related to legal.
Agreed. If we abort, we can immediately cut another release candidate and start another vote. No need for the test engineers in the community to due a full round of testing prior to seeing a new vote.
I would, however, love any future vote to include test engineers personally voting based on testing the official RC artifacts!
> Seems recasting another round voting is inevitable?
>
I'm going to leave this thread open until the morning to gather more opinions and comments. However, I think you are right. In all likelihood, I'll abort tomorrow morning and create a new RC and vote thread.
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Oct 11, 2012, at 5:47 PM, "Simon Weller" <sw...@ena.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> <On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 7:56 PM, Wido den Hollander <wi...@widodh.nl> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/11/2012 03:21 AM, Chip Childers (ASF) wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi All,
>>>>
>>>> I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating)
>>>> Release 4.0.0-incubating.
>>>>
>>>> Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
>>>>
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4
>>>> .0+test+procedure
>>>>
>>>> We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
>>>> artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
>>>> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so
>>>> please give it a shot!
>>>
>>>
>>> Sorry for stopping the +1 spree, but I'm going to vote -1.
>>>
>>> While testing the artifact I ran into CLOUDSTACK-316 (which I created).
>>>
>>> QA (nofi) only tested with cloudbr0 in their setup and never tested
>>> usage with other traffic labels.
>>>
>>> After talking with Edison and Marcus we came up with commit
>>> 513b680d96d07fd44479995ac5eb6358725c9421 which resolves it.
>>>
>>> The problem in my setup was that adding the host would fail and
>>> you'd have to figure out what was going wrong.
>>>
>>> I understood what was going wrong, but this would/could scare a new
>>> user away since a very simple use-case didn't work during the wizard.
>>>
>>> So my vote is -1 on this artifact.
>>>
>>> Wido
>>>
>>> Wido,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the detailed testing.
>>>
>>> IMO, I believe we would be best served aborting round 1 and
>>> regenerating a new release artifact with the fix for your issue. I
>>> would also include the fixes for at least CLOUDSTACK-314 (Citrix
>>> license header remains in
>>> test/integration/component/test_allocation_states.py) and
>>> CLOUDSTACK-302 (New Features Are Added to ReleaseNotes). Both of
>>> these are low risk changes, but important documentation and legal
>>> issues.
>>>
>>> I'm not going to abort the vote immediately, but I would like to get
>>> opinions from other community members on this topic.
>>>
>>> -chip
>>
>> This is a good catch. We have always used cloudbr0, so we didn't test this in our lab either. This definitely needs to be addressed as it's going to cause lots of pain for new KVM users.
>>
>> I'm changing my vote to -1.
>>
>> - Si
>>
>> <snip>
>
RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Will Chan <wi...@citrix.com>.
I think points 1 and 2 are fair enough. Thanks for the clarification.
Will
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.childers@sungard.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 12:21 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
>
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 12:28 PM, Will Chan <wi...@citrix.com> wrote:
> > I realize just blindly taking QA's test as a proxy is not actual doing
> anything but what if you are actually sitting down with a QA engineer, and
> executing the same steps with them albeit doing it on the same setup to
> save time? Would that not count?
> >
> > The second question is if the QA engineer has verified the build before the
> vote, would he/she need to redo the exact same steps afterwards to vote?
> If the answer to this is "Yes", then I suppose my first claim is useless.
> >
> > Sorry if I am asking these questions but I wasn't sure how this voting
> process goes because I can assure you I've spent huge amounts of time
> QA/testing the build with the QA engineers and sometimes do not have the
> time to do them again. However, if the vote cast is about individuals doing
> it themselves after the vote cast, I can abstain from voting and simply just
> comment for the QA.
> >
> > Will
>
> I think that we are mixing things here. The Citrix QA engineers have done
> fantastic work as part of the community effort to get to the voting process
> phase.
>
> Now that we are cutting release candidates, this moves from a period
> where we are relying on the QA team's skills to test features / functions /
> docs, and into a period where individual responsibility kicks in.
>
> The release testing process [1] includes three major sets of checks:
>
> First, it asks the voter to verify things like "Is the downloaded source
> archive exactly the same as what we know to be in the git repo at the
> commit-ish that was announced as the RC source?" and "Do the signatures
> and hash'es match up as expected?".
>
> Second, it asks the voter to review the source code package itself for legal
> issues.
>
> Third, it includes a set of *minimum* build / functional tests that are useful
> in determining that the functionality is as expected. This is the step that
> starts to repeat the previous QA testing process.
> Some individuals may expand or alter what they do in this phase...
> for example, Wido obviously tested the release candidate in an
> environment other than DevCloud. That's OK! I look at this phase as being
> one where people validate the core functions that they expect to work.
>
> So if I was in your shoes, I wouldn't abstain from voting. I'd spend time
> looking at phase 1 and 2, and then run through the basic devcloud tests.
> For QA engineers that want to participate in the RC testing, the same thing
> applies! Just like others, they might choose to double check things in an
> environment of their choosing. As long as people are testing the exact
> software that's in the release candidate artifacts, any amount of functional
> re-test is good.
>
> The point about one's vote being as an individual is that Apache relies on
> these individual verification steps to be executed by multiple individuals.
> That's also the reason why there are rules about a vote only passing if there
> are at least 3 PPMC/IPMC votes on the dev list, and then a second round of
> voting within the incubator general list where at least 3 IPMC votes need to
> be recorded. This, combined with the community-wide vote having to have
> more +1's than -1's, is basically how ASF has delegated responsibility for
> verifying a release.
>
> [1]
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0
> +test+procedure
>
>
> > From: Noah Slater [nslater@tumbolia.org]
> > Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 10:40 PM
> > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first
> > round
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 4:48 AM, Will Chan <wi...@citrix.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Go ahead with the recast of votes then if you don't want QA to re-test.
> >> My binding vote is based on Citrix QA test.
> >>
> >
> > It is wise to consider the QA testing, but your vote must be based on
> > your testing of the artefact itself. When you vote, you are voting as
> > an individual. It is your personal mark of "I have downloaded this
> > artefact and I have verified that we should release this personally."
> >
> > Please do not rely on other people's testing as a proxy for your vote.
> > All that does is add noise. If we want the QA team's efforts to impact
> > our vote (of course we do) then the QA team should vote. (And I am not
> > suggesting they run the full battery of tests. Just that they use
> > their experience to verify the release candidate like everyone else.)
> > We don't need people voting +1 to signal that they are pleased with the
> QA team results.
> >
> >
> > --
> > NS
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org>.
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 8:21 PM, Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com>wrote:
>
> So if I was in your shoes, I wouldn't abstain from voting.
+1
I agree with everything Chip said.
QA testing is superb, and it's so great that we're doing it. But releasing
testing is something else, that is hopefully enough for everyone on this
list to run through at release time. If that is too onerous, then we may
need to simplify, or automate some of our release testing. But at the end
of the day, we're testing the release itself, and not the product, at this
stage.
The point about one's vote being as an individual is that Apache
> relies on these individual verification steps to be executed by
> multiple individuals. That's also the reason why there are rules
> about a vote only passing if there are at least 3 PPMC/IPMC votes on
> the dev list, and then a second round of voting within the incubator
> general list where at least 3 IPMC votes need to be recorded. This,
> combined with the community-wide vote having to have more +1's than
> -1's, is basically how ASF has delegated responsibility for verifying
> a release.
>
Just one note here. A -1 on release vote is a Big Deal. I would not release
anything with a -1 vote on it. Doesn't even matter if the vote is binding
or not. Personally, I would want to address the concerns of that -1 vote
until was changed, or I could cut a new release. And I would be
exceptionally surprised if I ever saw project release despite someone's -1
on the release.
--
NS
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com>.
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 12:28 PM, Will Chan <wi...@citrix.com> wrote:
> I realize just blindly taking QA's test as a proxy is not actual doing anything but what if you are actually sitting down with a QA engineer, and executing the same steps with them albeit doing it on the same setup to save time? Would that not count?
>
> The second question is if the QA engineer has verified the build before the vote, would he/she need to redo the exact same steps afterwards to vote? If the answer to this is "Yes", then I suppose my first claim is useless.
>
> Sorry if I am asking these questions but I wasn't sure how this voting process goes because I can assure you I've spent huge amounts of time QA/testing the build with the QA engineers and sometimes do not have the time to do them again. However, if the vote cast is about individuals doing it themselves after the vote cast, I can abstain from voting and simply just comment for the QA.
>
> Will
I think that we are mixing things here. The Citrix QA engineers have
done fantastic work as part of the community effort to get to the
voting process phase.
Now that we are cutting release candidates, this moves from a period
where we are relying on the QA team's skills to test features /
functions / docs, and into a period where individual responsibility
kicks in.
The release testing process [1] includes three major sets of checks:
First, it asks the voter to verify things like "Is the downloaded
source archive exactly the same as what we know to be in the git repo
at the commit-ish that was announced as the RC source?" and "Do the
signatures and hash'es match up as expected?".
Second, it asks the voter to review the source code package itself for
legal issues.
Third, it includes a set of *minimum* build / functional tests that
are useful in determining that the functionality is as expected. This
is the step that starts to repeat the previous QA testing process.
Some individuals may expand or alter what they do in this phase...
for example, Wido obviously tested the release candidate in an
environment other than DevCloud. That's OK! I look at this phase as
being one where people validate the core functions that they expect to
work.
So if I was in your shoes, I wouldn't abstain from voting. I'd spend
time looking at phase 1 and 2, and then run through the basic devcloud
tests. For QA engineers that want to participate in the RC testing,
the same thing applies! Just like others, they might choose to double
check things in an environment of their choosing. As long as people
are testing the exact software that's in the release candidate
artifacts, any amount of functional re-test is good.
The point about one's vote being as an individual is that Apache
relies on these individual verification steps to be executed by
multiple individuals. That's also the reason why there are rules
about a vote only passing if there are at least 3 PPMC/IPMC votes on
the dev list, and then a second round of voting within the incubator
general list where at least 3 IPMC votes need to be recorded. This,
combined with the community-wide vote having to have more +1's than
-1's, is basically how ASF has delegated responsibility for verifying
a release.
[1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+test+procedure
> From: Noah Slater [nslater@tumbolia.org]
> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 10:40 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
>
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 4:48 AM, Will Chan <wi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>> Go ahead with the recast of votes then if you don't want QA to re-test.
>> My binding vote is based on Citrix QA test.
>>
>
> It is wise to consider the QA testing, but your vote must be based on your
> testing of the artefact itself. When you vote, you are voting as an
> individual. It is your personal mark of "I have downloaded this artefact
> and I have verified that we should release this personally."
>
> Please do not rely on other people's testing as a proxy for your vote. All
> that does is add noise. If we want the QA team's efforts to impact our vote
> (of course we do) then the QA team should vote. (And I am not suggesting
> they run the full battery of tests. Just that they use their experience to
> verify the release candidate like everyone else.) We don't need people
> voting +1 to signal that they are pleased with the QA team results.
>
>
> --
> NS
RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Will Chan <wi...@citrix.com>.
I realize just blindly taking QA's test as a proxy is not actual doing anything but what if you are actually sitting down with a QA engineer, and executing the same steps with them albeit doing it on the same setup to save time? Would that not count?
The second question is if the QA engineer has verified the build before the vote, would he/she need to redo the exact same steps afterwards to vote? If the answer to this is "Yes", then I suppose my first claim is useless.
Sorry if I am asking these questions but I wasn't sure how this voting process goes because I can assure you I've spent huge amounts of time QA/testing the build with the QA engineers and sometimes do not have the time to do them again. However, if the vote cast is about individuals doing it themselves after the vote cast, I can abstain from voting and simply just comment for the QA.
Will
________________________________________
From: Noah Slater [nslater@tumbolia.org]
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 10:40 PM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 4:48 AM, Will Chan <wi...@citrix.com> wrote:
> Go ahead with the recast of votes then if you don't want QA to re-test.
> My binding vote is based on Citrix QA test.
>
It is wise to consider the QA testing, but your vote must be based on your
testing of the artefact itself. When you vote, you are voting as an
individual. It is your personal mark of "I have downloaded this artefact
and I have verified that we should release this personally."
Please do not rely on other people's testing as a proxy for your vote. All
that does is add noise. If we want the QA team's efforts to impact our vote
(of course we do) then the QA team should vote. (And I am not suggesting
they run the full battery of tests. Just that they use their experience to
verify the release candidate like everyone else.) We don't need people
voting +1 to signal that they are pleased with the QA team results.
--
NS
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org>.
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 4:48 AM, Will Chan <wi...@citrix.com> wrote:
> Go ahead with the recast of votes then if you don't want QA to re-test.
> My binding vote is based on Citrix QA test.
>
It is wise to consider the QA testing, but your vote must be based on your
testing of the artefact itself. When you vote, you are voting as an
individual. It is your personal mark of "I have downloaded this artefact
and I have verified that we should release this personally."
Please do not rely on other people's testing as a proxy for your vote. All
that does is add noise. If we want the QA team's efforts to impact our vote
(of course we do) then the QA team should vote. (And I am not suggesting
they run the full battery of tests. Just that they use their experience to
verify the release candidate like everyone else.) We don't need people
voting +1 to signal that they are pleased with the QA team results.
--
NS
RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Will Chan <wi...@citrix.com>.
Go ahead with the recast of votes then if you don't want QA to re-test. My binding vote is based on Citrix QA test.
Will
________________________________________
From: Chip Childers [chip.childers@sungard.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 7:44 PM
To: <cl...@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
On Oct 11, 2012, at 10:04 PM, Edison Su <Ed...@citrix.com> wrote:
> Both of these issues we found today are not blocker and the fixes are trivial.
> We don't need another round test from QA team: the fix for bug CloudStack-316 is agreed by Wido, Marcus and I, and tested by Wido, another bug fixes are related to legal.
Agreed. If we abort, we can immediately cut another release candidate
and start another vote. No need for the test engineers in the
community to due a full round of testing prior to seeing a new vote.
I would, however, love any future vote to include test engineers
personally voting based on testing the official RC artifacts!
> Seems recasting another round voting is inevitable?
>
I'm going to leave this thread open until the morning to gather more
opinions and comments. However, I think you are right. In all
likelihood, I'll abort tomorrow morning and create a new RC and vote
thread.
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Oct 11, 2012, at 5:47 PM, "Simon Weller" <sw...@ena.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> <On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 7:56 PM, Wido den Hollander <wi...@widodh.nl> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/11/2012 03:21 AM, Chip Childers (ASF) wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi All,
>>>>
>>>> I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release
>>>> 4.0.0-incubating.
>>>>
>>>> Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
>>>>
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+test+procedure
>>>>
>>>> We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
>>>> artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
>>>> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
>>>> give it a shot!
>>>
>>>
>>> Sorry for stopping the +1 spree, but I'm going to vote -1.
>>>
>>> While testing the artifact I ran into CLOUDSTACK-316 (which I created).
>>>
>>> QA (nofi) only tested with cloudbr0 in their setup and never tested usage
>>> with other traffic labels.
>>>
>>> After talking with Edison and Marcus we came up with commit
>>> 513b680d96d07fd44479995ac5eb6358725c9421 which resolves it.
>>>
>>> The problem in my setup was that adding the host would fail and you'd have
>>> to figure out what was going wrong.
>>>
>>> I understood what was going wrong, but this would/could scare a new user
>>> away since a very simple use-case didn't work during the wizard.
>>>
>>> So my vote is -1 on this artifact.
>>>
>>> Wido
>>>
>>> Wido,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the detailed testing.
>>>
>>> IMO, I believe we would be best served aborting round 1 and
>>> regenerating a new release artifact with the fix for your issue. I
>>> would also include the fixes for at least CLOUDSTACK-314 (Citrix
>>> license header remains in
>>> test/integration/component/test_allocation_states.py) and
>>> CLOUDSTACK-302 (New Features Are Added to ReleaseNotes). Both of
>>> these are low risk changes, but important documentation and legal
>>> issues.
>>>
>>> I'm not going to abort the vote immediately, but I would like to get
>>> opinions from other community members on this topic.
>>>
>>> -chip
>>
>> This is a good catch. We have always used cloudbr0, so we didn't test this in our lab either. This definitely needs to be addressed as it's going to cause lots of pain for new KVM users.
>>
>> I'm changing my vote to -1.
>>
>> - Si
>>
>> <snip>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com>.
On Oct 11, 2012, at 10:04 PM, Edison Su <Ed...@citrix.com> wrote:
> Both of these issues we found today are not blocker and the fixes are trivial.
> We don't need another round test from QA team: the fix for bug CloudStack-316 is agreed by Wido, Marcus and I, and tested by Wido, another bug fixes are related to legal.
Agreed. If we abort, we can immediately cut another release candidate
and start another vote. No need for the test engineers in the
community to due a full round of testing prior to seeing a new vote.
I would, however, love any future vote to include test engineers
personally voting based on testing the official RC artifacts!
> Seems recasting another round voting is inevitable?
>
I'm going to leave this thread open until the morning to gather more
opinions and comments. However, I think you are right. In all
likelihood, I'll abort tomorrow morning and create a new RC and vote
thread.
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Oct 11, 2012, at 5:47 PM, "Simon Weller" <sw...@ena.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> <On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 7:56 PM, Wido den Hollander <wi...@widodh.nl> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/11/2012 03:21 AM, Chip Childers (ASF) wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi All,
>>>>
>>>> I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release
>>>> 4.0.0-incubating.
>>>>
>>>> Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
>>>>
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+test+procedure
>>>>
>>>> We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
>>>> artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
>>>> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
>>>> give it a shot!
>>>
>>>
>>> Sorry for stopping the +1 spree, but I'm going to vote -1.
>>>
>>> While testing the artifact I ran into CLOUDSTACK-316 (which I created).
>>>
>>> QA (nofi) only tested with cloudbr0 in their setup and never tested usage
>>> with other traffic labels.
>>>
>>> After talking with Edison and Marcus we came up with commit
>>> 513b680d96d07fd44479995ac5eb6358725c9421 which resolves it.
>>>
>>> The problem in my setup was that adding the host would fail and you'd have
>>> to figure out what was going wrong.
>>>
>>> I understood what was going wrong, but this would/could scare a new user
>>> away since a very simple use-case didn't work during the wizard.
>>>
>>> So my vote is -1 on this artifact.
>>>
>>> Wido
>>>
>>> Wido,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the detailed testing.
>>>
>>> IMO, I believe we would be best served aborting round 1 and
>>> regenerating a new release artifact with the fix for your issue. I
>>> would also include the fixes for at least CLOUDSTACK-314 (Citrix
>>> license header remains in
>>> test/integration/component/test_allocation_states.py) and
>>> CLOUDSTACK-302 (New Features Are Added to ReleaseNotes). Both of
>>> these are low risk changes, but important documentation and legal
>>> issues.
>>>
>>> I'm not going to abort the vote immediately, but I would like to get
>>> opinions from other community members on this topic.
>>>
>>> -chip
>>
>> This is a good catch. We have always used cloudbr0, so we didn't test this in our lab either. This definitely needs to be addressed as it's going to cause lots of pain for new KVM users.
>>
>> I'm changing my vote to -1.
>>
>> - Si
>>
>> <snip>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Edison Su <Ed...@citrix.com>.
Both of these issues we found today are not blocker and the fixes are trivial.
We don't need another round test from QA team: the fix for bug CloudStack-316 is agreed by Wido, Marcus and I, and tested by Wido, another bug fixes are related to legal.
Seems recasting another round voting is inevitable?
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 11, 2012, at 5:47 PM, "Simon Weller" <sw...@ena.com> wrote:
>
>
> <On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 7:56 PM, Wido den Hollander <wi...@widodh.nl> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 10/11/2012 03:21 AM, Chip Childers (ASF) wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release
>>> 4.0.0-incubating.
>>>
>>> Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
>>>
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+test+procedure
>>>
>>> We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
>>> artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
>>> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
>>> give it a shot!
>>
>>
>> Sorry for stopping the +1 spree, but I'm going to vote -1.
>>
>> While testing the artifact I ran into CLOUDSTACK-316 (which I created).
>>
>> QA (nofi) only tested with cloudbr0 in their setup and never tested usage
>> with other traffic labels.
>>
>> After talking with Edison and Marcus we came up with commit
>> 513b680d96d07fd44479995ac5eb6358725c9421 which resolves it.
>>
>> The problem in my setup was that adding the host would fail and you'd have
>> to figure out what was going wrong.
>>
>> I understood what was going wrong, but this would/could scare a new user
>> away since a very simple use-case didn't work during the wizard.
>>
>> So my vote is -1 on this artifact.
>>
>> Wido
>>
>> Wido,
>>
>> Thanks for the detailed testing.
>>
>> IMO, I believe we would be best served aborting round 1 and
>> regenerating a new release artifact with the fix for your issue. I
>> would also include the fixes for at least CLOUDSTACK-314 (Citrix
>> license header remains in
>> test/integration/component/test_allocation_states.py) and
>> CLOUDSTACK-302 (New Features Are Added to ReleaseNotes). Both of
>> these are low risk changes, but important documentation and legal
>> issues.
>>
>> I'm not going to abort the vote immediately, but I would like to get
>> opinions from other community members on this topic.
>>
>> -chip
>
> This is a good catch. We have always used cloudbr0, so we didn't test this in our lab either. This definitely needs to be addressed as it's going to cause lots of pain for new KVM users.
>
> I'm changing my vote to -1.
>
> - Si
>
> <snip>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Simon Weller <sw...@ena.com>.
<On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 7:56 PM, Wido den Hollander <wi...@widodh.nl> wrote:
>
>
> On 10/11/2012 03:21 AM, Chip Childers (ASF) wrote:
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release
>> 4.0.0-incubating.
>>
>> Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+test+procedure
>>
>> We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
>> artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
>> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
>> give it a shot!
>
>
> Sorry for stopping the +1 spree, but I'm going to vote -1.
>
> While testing the artifact I ran into CLOUDSTACK-316 (which I created).
>
> QA (nofi) only tested with cloudbr0 in their setup and never tested usage
> with other traffic labels.
>
> After talking with Edison and Marcus we came up with commit
> 513b680d96d07fd44479995ac5eb6358725c9421 which resolves it.
>
> The problem in my setup was that adding the host would fail and you'd have
> to figure out what was going wrong.
>
> I understood what was going wrong, but this would/could scare a new user
> away since a very simple use-case didn't work during the wizard.
>
> So my vote is -1 on this artifact.
>
> Wido
>
>Wido,
>
>Thanks for the detailed testing.
>
>IMO, I believe we would be best served aborting round 1 and
>regenerating a new release artifact with the fix for your issue. I
>would also include the fixes for at least CLOUDSTACK-314 (Citrix
>license header remains in
>test/integration/component/test_allocation_states.py) and
>CLOUDSTACK-302 (New Features Are Added to ReleaseNotes). Both of
>these are low risk changes, but important documentation and legal
>issues.
>
>I'm not going to abort the vote immediately, but I would like to get
>opinions from other community members on this topic.
>
>-chip
This is a good catch. We have always used cloudbr0, so we didn't test this in our lab either. This definitely needs to be addressed as it's going to cause lots of pain for new KVM users.
I'm changing my vote to -1.
- Si
<snip>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com>.
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 7:56 PM, Wido den Hollander <wi...@widodh.nl> wrote:
>
>
> On 10/11/2012 03:21 AM, Chip Childers (ASF) wrote:
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release
>> 4.0.0-incubating.
>>
>> Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+test+procedure
>>
>> We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
>> artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
>> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
>> give it a shot!
>
>
> Sorry for stopping the +1 spree, but I'm going to vote -1.
>
> While testing the artifact I ran into CLOUDSTACK-316 (which I created).
>
> QA (nofi) only tested with cloudbr0 in their setup and never tested usage
> with other traffic labels.
>
> After talking with Edison and Marcus we came up with commit
> 513b680d96d07fd44479995ac5eb6358725c9421 which resolves it.
>
> The problem in my setup was that adding the host would fail and you'd have
> to figure out what was going wrong.
>
> I understood what was going wrong, but this would/could scare a new user
> away since a very simple use-case didn't work during the wizard.
>
> So my vote is -1 on this artifact.
>
> Wido
Wido,
Thanks for the detailed testing.
IMO, I believe we would be best served aborting round 1 and
regenerating a new release artifact with the fix for your issue. I
would also include the fixes for at least CLOUDSTACK-314 (Citrix
license header remains in
test/integration/component/test_allocation_states.py) and
CLOUDSTACK-302 (New Features Are Added to ReleaseNotes). Both of
these are low risk changes, but important documentation and legal
issues.
I'm not going to abort the vote immediately, but I would like to get
opinions from other community members on this topic.
-chip
>
>
>>
>>
>> The following artifacts are up for the vote:
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.0-incubating/
>>
>> PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
>> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
>>
>> Git Branch and Commit SH:
>>
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
>> Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
>>
>> List of changes:
>>
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
>>
>>
>> Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>
>>
>> For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be
>> sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
>> [ ] +1 approve
>> [ ] +0 no opinion
>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> -chip
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Wido den Hollander <wi...@widodh.nl>.
On 10/11/2012 03:21 AM, Chip Childers (ASF) wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release
> 4.0.0-incubating.
>
> Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+test+procedure
>
> We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
> artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
> give it a shot!
Sorry for stopping the +1 spree, but I'm going to vote -1.
While testing the artifact I ran into CLOUDSTACK-316 (which I created).
QA (nofi) only tested with cloudbr0 in their setup and never tested
usage with other traffic labels.
After talking with Edison and Marcus we came up with commit
513b680d96d07fd44479995ac5eb6358725c9421 which resolves it.
The problem in my setup was that adding the host would fail and you'd
have to figure out what was going wrong.
I understood what was going wrong, but this would/could scare a new user
away since a very simple use-case didn't work during the wizard.
So my vote is -1 on this artifact.
Wido
>
>
> The following artifacts are up for the vote:
> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.0-incubating/
>
> PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
>
> Git Branch and Commit SH:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
> Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
>
> List of changes:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
>
>
> Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
>
> For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be
> sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
> [ ] +1 approve
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>
> Thanks!
>
> -chip
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Hugo Trippaers <HT...@schubergphilis.com>.
+1 Great job everyone :-)
Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPad
Op 11 okt. 2012 om 03:21 heeft "Chip Childers (ASF)" <ch...@apache.org> het volgende geschreven:
> Hi All,
>
> I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release
> 4.0.0-incubating.
>
> Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+test+procedure
>
> We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
> artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
> give it a shot!
>
>
> The following artifacts are up for the vote:
> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.0-incubating/
>
> PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
>
> Git Branch and Commit SH:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
> Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
>
> List of changes:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
>
>
> Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
>
> For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be
> sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
> [ ] +1 approve
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>
> Thanks!
>
> -chip
RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Pranav Saxena <pr...@citrix.com>.
+1
Awesome work !
Regards,
Pranav
-----Original Message-----
From: Abhinandan Prateek [mailto:Abhinandan.Prateek@citrix.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 10:30 AM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
+1
On 11/10/12 10:12 AM, "Ahmad Emneina" <Ah...@citrix.com> wrote:
>+1
>
>On 10/10/12 6:21 PM, "Chip Childers (ASF)" <ch...@apache.org>
>wrote:
>
>>Hi All,
>>
>>I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release
>>4.0.0-incubating.
>>
>>Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+
>>tes
>>t
>>+procedure
>>
>>We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
>>artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
>>release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
>>give it a shot!
>>
>>
>>The following artifacts are up for the vote:
>>http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.0-
>>inc
>>u
>>bating/
>>
>>PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
>>http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
>>
>>Git Branch and Commit SH:
>>https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=s
>>hor
>>t
>>log;h=refs/heads/4.0
>>Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
>>
>>List of changes:
>>https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=b
>>lob
>>_
>>plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
>>
>>
>>Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>
>>
>>For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be
>>sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
>>[ ] +1 approve
>>[ ] +0 no opinion
>>[ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>>
>>Thanks!
>>
>>-chip
>>
>
>
>--
>Æ
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Sebastien Goasguen <ru...@gmail.com>.
+1
PS: Followed testing procedure all the way to running successfully ec2-describe-images query&SOAP calls. I have a devcloud issue which prevents me from starting instances but it does not affect my vote.
-sebastien
On Oct 11, 2012, at 11:45 AM, Rajesh Battala <ra...@citrix.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> Thanks
> Rajesh Battala
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Abhinandan Prateek [mailto:Abhinandan.Prateek@citrix.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 10:30 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
>
> +1
>
> On 11/10/12 10:12 AM, "Ahmad Emneina" <Ah...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> On 10/10/12 6:21 PM, "Chip Childers (ASF)" <ch...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release
>>> 4.0.0-incubating.
>>>
>>> Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+
>>> tes
>>> t
>>> +procedure
>>>
>>> We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
>>> artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
>>> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
>>> give it a shot!
>>>
>>>
>>> The following artifacts are up for the vote:
>>> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.0-
>>> inc
>>> u
>>> bating/
>>>
>>> PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
>>> http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
>>>
>>> Git Branch and Commit SH:
>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=s
>>> hor
>>> t
>>> log;h=refs/heads/4.0
>>> Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
>>>
>>> List of changes:
>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=b
>>> lob
>>> _
>>> plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
>>>
>>>
>>> Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>>
>>>
>>> For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be
>>> sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
>>> [ ] +1 approve
>>> [ ] +0 no opinion
>>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> -chip
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Æ
>>
>>
>>
>
RE: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Rajesh Battala <ra...@citrix.com>.
+1
Thanks
Rajesh Battala
-----Original Message-----
From: Abhinandan Prateek [mailto:Abhinandan.Prateek@citrix.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 10:30 AM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
+1
On 11/10/12 10:12 AM, "Ahmad Emneina" <Ah...@citrix.com> wrote:
>+1
>
>On 10/10/12 6:21 PM, "Chip Childers (ASF)" <ch...@apache.org>
>wrote:
>
>>Hi All,
>>
>>I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release
>>4.0.0-incubating.
>>
>>Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+
>>tes
>>t
>>+procedure
>>
>>We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
>>artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
>>release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
>>give it a shot!
>>
>>
>>The following artifacts are up for the vote:
>>http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.0-
>>inc
>>u
>>bating/
>>
>>PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
>>http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
>>
>>Git Branch and Commit SH:
>>https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=s
>>hor
>>t
>>log;h=refs/heads/4.0
>>Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
>>
>>List of changes:
>>https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=b
>>lob
>>_
>>plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
>>
>>
>>Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>
>>
>>For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be
>>sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
>>[ ] +1 approve
>>[ ] +0 no opinion
>>[ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>>
>>Thanks!
>>
>>-chip
>>
>
>
>--
>Æ
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Abhinandan Prateek <Ab...@citrix.com>.
+1
On 11/10/12 10:12 AM, "Ahmad Emneina" <Ah...@citrix.com> wrote:
>+1
>
>On 10/10/12 6:21 PM, "Chip Childers (ASF)" <ch...@apache.org>
>wrote:
>
>>Hi All,
>>
>>I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release
>>4.0.0-incubating.
>>
>>Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+tes
>>t
>>+procedure
>>
>>We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
>>artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
>>release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
>>give it a shot!
>>
>>
>>The following artifacts are up for the vote:
>>http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.0-inc
>>u
>>bating/
>>
>>PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
>>http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
>>
>>Git Branch and Commit SH:
>>https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=shor
>>t
>>log;h=refs/heads/4.0
>>Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
>>
>>List of changes:
>>https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=blob
>>_
>>plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
>>
>>
>>Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>
>>
>>For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be
>>sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
>>[ ] +1 approve
>>[ ] +0 no opinion
>>[ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>>
>>Thanks!
>>
>>-chip
>>
>
>
>--
>Æ
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Ahmad Emneina <Ah...@citrix.com>.
+1
On 10/10/12 6:21 PM, "Chip Childers (ASF)" <ch...@apache.org> wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release
>4.0.0-incubating.
>
>Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+test
>+procedure
>
>We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
>artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
>release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
>give it a shot!
>
>
>The following artifacts are up for the vote:
>http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.0-incu
>bating/
>
>PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
>http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
>
>Git Branch and Commit SH:
>https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=short
>log;h=refs/heads/4.0
>Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
>
>List of changes:
>https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=blob_
>plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
>
>
>Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
>
>For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be
>sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
>[ ] +1 approve
>[ ] +0 no opinion
>[ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>
>Thanks!
>
>-chip
>
--
Æ
Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Posted by Simon Weller <sw...@ena.com>.
+1
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chip Childers (ASF)" <ch...@apache.org>
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 8:21:20 PM
Subject: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.0.0-incubating Release, first round
Hi All,
I would like to call a vote for Apache CloudStack (Incubating) Release
4.0.0-incubating.
Instructions for Validating and Testing the artifacts can be found here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStack+4.0+test+procedure
We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so please
give it a shot!
The following artifacts are up for the vote:
http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/releases/4.0.0-incubating/
PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
http://people.apache.org/~chipchilders/dist/cloudstack/KEYS
Git Branch and Commit SH:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.0
Commit: 5ee613fbf2da5f6212f2f166c980506e0c6cb5cb
List of changes:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cloudstack.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=refs/heads/4.0
Vote will be open for 72 hours.
For sanity in tallying the vote, can PPMC and IPMC members please be
sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
[ ] +1 approve
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
Thanks!
-chip