Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-cloudstack-users-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-cloudstack-users-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0E05FD077 for ; Wed, 17 Oct 2012 18:41:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 99416 invoked by uid 500); 17 Oct 2012 18:41:43 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-cloudstack-users-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 99399 invoked by uid 500); 17 Oct 2012 18:41:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cloudstack-users-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: moderator for cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 94310 invoked by uid 99); 17 Oct 2012 18:40:12 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at bbits.ca From: "Kelcey Damage \(BBITS\)" To: Cc: References: <024e01cdac95$27ee36c0$77caa440$@bbits.ca> In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: Drop OVM in 4.0? Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 11:39:29 -0700 Message-ID: <026901cdac96$bdf3b630$39db2290$@bbits.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQILFdYcrOzCYKhxBalQ+LS4+3LKnwJkJl+kAf4KQe+XH/AnMA== Content-Language: en-us X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org I think this is the best outcome and compromise. +1=20 -----Original Message----- From: Edison Su [mailto:Edison.su@citrix.com]=20 Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 11:38 AM To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org Cc: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org Subject: RE: Drop OVM in 4.0? Possible, as the OVM code is in its own separate folder, the OVM fix = will not impact other code at all. We can have 4.0.x release to fix OVM. > -----Original Message----- > From: Kelcey Damage (BBITS) [mailto:kelcey@bbits.ca] > Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 11:28 AM > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > Cc: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org > Subject: RE: Drop OVM in 4.0? >=20 > Could OVM be made a hot fix post 4.0 release, but not held to the=20 > official 4.1? >=20 > KELCEY DAMAGE > Infrastructure Systems Architect > www.backbonetechnology.com > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > - > -- > kelcey@bbits.ca >=20 > address: 55 East 7th Ave, Vancouver, BC, V5T 1M4 > tel: +1 604 713 8560 ext:114 > fax: +1 604 605 0964 > skype: kelcey.damage >=20 >=20 >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Edison Su [mailto:Edison.su@citrix.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 11:26 AM > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > Cc: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Drop OVM in 4.0? >=20 > Hi All, > Due to the bug http://bugs.cloudstack.org/browse/CS-16488 and the=20 > license issue(some files related to OVM are removed on 4.0 > branch(https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=3Dincubator- > = cloudstack.git;a=3Dcommit;h=3D7f8a1aabbf9b6764780e0c2ad870009c5555c2d4)),= > OVM is not supported on 4.0 branch, currently. > It will take a while(maybe one or two weeks to get OVM back to=20 > work), will we wait for OVM before releasing 4.0, or move OVM into 4.1 = release?