incubator-cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jessica Wang <Jessica.W...@citrix.com>
Subject RE: Reverting UI for IPv6 in 4.1
Date Mon, 11 Mar 2013 17:20:04 GMT
Chip,

> Based on Ahmad's last email, we've agreed.  Let's pull it from the UI now!

I've submitted a patch to revert UI for IPv6 at Fri 3/8/2013 4:12 PM.
(The subject of my email is "[ACS41][Patch Request] - Reverting UI for IPv6 in 4.1") 

Could you please review it?

Jessica W


-----Original Message-----
From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.childers@sungard.com] 
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2013 11:24 AM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc: Ahmad Emneina; Sheng Yang
Subject: Re: Reverting UI for IPv6 in 4.1

On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Sheng Yang <sheng@yasker.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 11:16 AM, Chip Childers
> <chip.childers@sungard.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 10:00:26AM -0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 7:20 AM, Chip Childers <chip.childers@sungard.com>
wrote:
>>> > On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 03:21:38PM +0530, Radhika Puthiyetath wrote:
>>> >> Hi Sheng, Chip and other community members,
>>> >>
>>> >> What have we decided about the IPv6 support in 4.1 ?
>>> >
>>> > Looks like it isn't decided.  Do you have an opinion?
>>> >
>>> > Do others?
>>> >
>>> > Sheng - can you try to bring this to a consensus?
>>>
>>> In fact I am trying to bring this to a consensus using this thread...
>>>
>>> I think we're OK with API only.
>>
>> Ahmad is suggesting otherwise, but I'm in agreement with you.  Our next
>> feature release is probably the right time to bring it into the UI.
>>
>> Ahmad - any reasoning you can share around why you suggest having it in
>> the UI?
>
> Sorry just found I missed the mail.
>
> If we want UI, I am thinking of if we can add some checkboxs or
> something highlighted to ensure that user aware that ipv6 template is
> needed?

Based on Ahmad's last email, we've agreed.  Let's pull it from the UI now!

>
> --Sheng
>>
>>>
>>> --Sheng
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >> API only, or both UI and APIs ? I am in the process of documenting this
feature.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Thank You
>>> >> -Radhika
>>> >>
>>> >> -----Original Message-----
>>> >> From: Ahmad Emneina [mailto:aemneina@gmail.com]
>>> >> Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 3:43 AM
>>> >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> >> Subject: Re: Reverting UI for IPv6 in 4.1
>>> >>
>>> >> UI + docs on how to use the feature via api and its caveats (system
template X).
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Sheng Yang <sheng@yasker.org>
wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> > On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Chip Childers
>>> >> > <chip.childers@sungard.com>
>>> >> > wrote:
>>> >> > > On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 01:50:20PM -0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
>>> >> > >> Hi,
>>> >> > >>
>>> >> > >> Since we didn't plan to include ipv6 template as default
for 4.1
>>> >> > >> release, is it necessary to revert the UI part of IPv6
to avoid
>>> >> > >> confusion in 4.1? We can support API only for 4.1
>>> >> > >>
>>> >> > >> --Sheng
>>> >> > >>
>>> >> > >
>>> >> > > So we talked about it being experimental.  Do you think we
should
>>> >> > > make experimental = API-based configuration only?  I tend
to lean
>>> >> > > that way
>>> >> > myself.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > I am OK with it, just want to hear more people's idea on it.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > If it's only API-based, it would be more difficult for potential
user
>>> >> > to try it. But left UI there without default system vm template
>>> >> > support would be misleading.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > --Sheng
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>>
>

Mime
View raw message