Skip to content

Conversation

@DaanHoogland
Copy link
Contributor

Description

This PR...

Types of changes

  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • Enhancement (improves an existing feature and functionality)
  • Cleanup (Code refactoring and cleanup, that may add test cases)
  • Build/CI
  • Test (unit or integration test code)

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Feature/Enhancement Scale

  • Major
  • Minor

Bug Severity

  • BLOCKER
  • Critical
  • Major
  • Minor
  • Trivial

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 22, 2026

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 7 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 17.68%. Comparing base (b1f870a) to head (1d3bad0).

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
...ava/com/cloud/upgrade/dao/Upgrade42200to42210.java 0.00% 7 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               4.22   #12500      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     17.59%   17.68%   +0.08%     
- Complexity    15611    15612       +1     
============================================
  Files          5910     5884      -26     
  Lines        529890   527457    -2433     
  Branches      64737    64395     -342     
============================================
+ Hits          93259    93261       +2     
+ Misses       426135   423700    -2435     
  Partials      10496    10496              
Flag Coverage Δ
uitests 3.60% <ø> (ø)
unittests 18.76% <0.00%> (+0.09%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

Copy link
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

This PR disables the deprecated UCS and Hyper-V hypervisor plugins by removing them from the build configuration and cleaning up related constants and configurations.

Changes:

  • Removed UCS and Hyper-V hypervisor plugin modules from the plugins build configuration
  • Removed UCS and Hyper-V plugin dependencies from the client module
  • Removed UCS-related configuration setting (UCSSyncBladeInterval) from server configuration
  • Removed two UCS-related API constants (UCS_DN and UCS_MANAGER_ID)

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 4 out of 4 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

File Description
plugins/pom.xml Removed hyperv and ucs hypervisor modules from the build
client/pom.xml Removed cloud-plugin-hypervisor-ucs and cloud-plugin-hypervisor-hyperv dependencies
server/src/main/java/com/cloud/configuration/Config.java Removed UCSSyncBladeInterval configuration enum entry
api/src/main/java/org/apache/cloudstack/api/ApiConstants.java Removed UCS_DN and UCS_MANAGER_ID constants

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

@apache apache deleted a comment from blueorangutan Jan 22, 2026
@apache apache deleted a comment from blueorangutan Jan 22, 2026
@apache apache deleted a comment from blueorangutan Jan 22, 2026
@blueorangutan
Copy link

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 16502

"Advanced",
ManagementServer.class,
Integer.class,
"ucs.sync.blade.interval",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

should we remove this from configuration table as well?

@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

Quality Gate Failed Quality Gate failed

Failed conditions
0.0% Coverage on New Code (required ≥ 40%)
62.5% Duplication on New Code (required ≤ 10%)

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants