incubator-cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chiradeep Vittal <>
Subject Re: Which branch to Nicira integration?
Date Thu, 07 Jun 2012 04:32:56 GMT
I assume Hugo et al would have to sign the Apache ICLA, even though they are not committers?
They will be contributors so they need to sign the CLA?


On Jun 6, 2012, at 20:59, "David Nalley" <> wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 10:52 PM, David Nalley <> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 9:19 PM, Hugo Trippaers
>> <> wrote:
>>> Heya all,
>>> This afternoon we had a nice chat with Chiradeep about the Nicira integration.
It's moving along nicely know.
>>> However while setting up a test environment with a branch containing new code,
i ran into trouble with the secondary storage vm. Troubleshooting that i found that the master
brach (which i used to base my changes on) is lacking all build steps for the console-proxy.
>>> So my questions are
>>> which branch should i base my changes and eventual patch on? 3.0.x, master or
another one?
>>> If master, why is the console-proxy taken out and how to work around this?
>> You should definitely be building off of a branch based on master in
>> the git repo - what errors are you seeing with the console proxy?  We
>> likely need to fix that.
>> --David
> That's my fault. I ripped console proxy out of the build-cloud.xml
> when I was removing it from the RPM (no idea what possessed me to do
> that), and if you didn't need to build systemVMs you wouldn't have
> noticed it missing. I just pushed that back in - but it's no longer
> part of build-all - but you should be able to build it (and the rest
> of CloudStack) with:
> ant build-console-proxy build-all
> Let me know if you run into problems.
> --David

View raw message