Correction in the assignment of the limit value of VPCs

[GeanJair]

Description

Currently, when listing the domains with the listDomains API, the VPC (vpclimit) limits displayed the value of the network limits (networklimit). This inconsistency has been corrected, so that the limit of VPCs are displayed correctly.

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

Bug Severity

• BLOCKER
• Critical
• Major
• Minor
• Trivial

Screenshots (if appropriate):

Before changes

After changes

How Has This Been Tested?

• I verified whether the VPC limit value displayed in the graphical interface actually matched the configured VPC limit value.

[weizhouapache]

code lgtm

[dheeraj12347]

Reviewed the change locally.

• Verified that DomainResponse#setVpcLimit() previously assigned networkLimit instead of the provided vpcLimit parameter.
• Confirmed that DomainJoinDaoImpl passes the correct vpcLimitDisplay value to this setter, so the fix addresses the root cause.
• Checked the surrounding response setters for consistency; the updated implementation now follows the expected setter pattern.
• Built the affected module successfully using mvn -pl api -am -DskipTests compile.

I wasn't able to complete runtime verification because I don't currently have a local CloudStack runtime environment available.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 17.11%. Comparing base (e8df87e) to head (d674c14).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...apache/cloudstack/api/response/DomainResponse.java	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               4.20   #13627      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     16.26%   17.11%   +0.85%     
  Complexity    13435    13435              
============================================
  Files          5667     5262     -405     
  Lines        500731   467706   -33025     
  Branches      60803    54905    -5898     
============================================
- Hits          81430    80067    -1363     
+ Misses       410197   378709   -31488     
+ Partials       9104     8930     -174     

Flag	Coverage Δ
uitests	?
unittests	17.11% <0.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️

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

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 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.

[DaanHoogland]

@blueorangutan package

[blueorangutan]

@DaanHoogland a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

[blueorangutan]

Packaging result [SF]: ✖️ el8 ✖️ el9 ✔️ debian ✖️ suse15. SL-JID 18625

[blueorangutan]

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 18632

[DaanHoogland]

@blueorangutan test

[blueorangutan]

@DaanHoogland a [SL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (ol8 mgmt + kvm-ol8) has been kicked to run smoke tests