commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Henning Schmiedehausen <henn...@schmiedehausen.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release configuration-1.10 based on RC1
Date Thu, 24 Oct 2013 06:33:16 GMT
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 9:48 AM, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com>wrote:

> Hen: Welcome back to the release mud pit! ;)
>

Thank you Gar, I am glad to be here again.

 I am looking at your site and I also checked out the tag and built it.

>
> -1
>
> The site, at the top says "Version 1.10-RC1", it should say "Version:
> 1.10".
>

It is an RC. So the artifacts and everything have RC1 in it. I can build
those with the final version, that is no big deal. But that opens the door
to having multiple artifacts with the same version floating around (and
would be a highly unusual way to do a release but at the end of the day I
don't really care). If you feel that this is a show stopper that makes you
vote a release down, then so be it.


>
> This is because the POM still says 1.10-RC1 instead of 1.10.
>

That's because I told it to say so. :-)


>
> This would also explain this:
>
> [WARNING] Downloading from JIRA failed. Received: [400]
> [WARNING] JIRA file
> C:\temp\rc\CONFIGURATION_1_10RC1\target\jira-results.xml doesn't exist.
> [WARNING]
> org.apache.maven.plugin.MojoExecutionException: Couldn't find any issues
> for the version '1.10-RC1' among the supplied issues: []
>
> The logo is missing its "TM" per Apache branding.
>

Well, as I did not touch anything in the site build, I assume that the 1.9
release tag builds a site that looks the same and someone patched the
released site. As I am not a psychic, how should I know that? I assume that
somewhere in the site files, a PNG needs to change. I wish I had time to
chase all these things down.


> When I run "mvn site" I get a unit test error but the build does not fail,
> which I do not understand:
>
> Running org.apache.commons.configuration.TestDataConfiguration
> Tests run: 50, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.002 sec
> <<< FAILURE! - in org.apache.commons.configuration.TestDataConfiguration
>
> testGetInetAddressInvalidType(org.apache.commons.configuration.TestDataConfiguration)
> Time elapsed: 0 sec  <<< FAILURE!
> java.lang.AssertionError: Expected exception:
> org.apache.commons.configuration.ConversionException
>         at
>
> org.junit.internal.runners.statements.ExpectException.evaluate(ExpectException.java:32)
>         at
>
> org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunBefores.evaluate(RunBefores.java:26)
>         at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runLeaf(ParentRunner.java:271)
>         at
>
> org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:70)
>         at
>
> org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:50)
>         at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.run(ParentRunner.java:238)
>         at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.schedule(ParentRunner.java:63)
>         at
> org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:236)
>         at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$000(ParentRunner.java:53)
>         at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$2.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:229)
>         at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.run(ParentRunner.java:309)
>         at
>
> org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.execute(JUnit4Provider.java:264)
>         at
>
> org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.executeTestSet(JUnit4Provider.java:153)
>         at
>
> org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.invoke(JUnit4Provider.java:124)
>         at
>
> org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.invokeProviderInSameClassLoader(ForkedBooter.java:200)
>         at
>
> org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.runSuitesInProcess(ForkedBooter.java:153)
>         at
> org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.main(ForkedBooter.java:103)
>


I have no idea. I built on Linux and Mac with JDK6 and JDK7 and it works
fine. It might be that building on Windows is broken. Please verify with
the 1.9 release tag (or trunk) and file a bug. I do not consider that a
showstopper, though and I also do not have the means to chase that problem
down.

If you can fix it, we can add a patch before doing the release.



> RAT and Clirr reports are clean.
>
> Cobertura reports the following have 0% test code coverage:
>
> - AppletConfiguration
> - HierarchicalXMLConfiguration
> - TokenMgrError
>

Since when is that a criteria for a release? I guess there never were any
tests for these in previous releases. At least the current site does not.


>
> This might not be a blocker but it does not inspire confidence.
>

My understanding of an Apache software release is that the bits shipped
need to adhere to the terms of the Apache license. Not that the code needs
to be good. If that were the case, I could name a dozen Apache projects
that would never ever be allowed to do a release. :-)



> Other reports look good.
>
> My setup:
>
> Apache Maven 3.1.1 (0728685237757ffbf44136acec0402957f723d9a; 2013-09-17
> 11:22:22-0400)
>

That is a bad idea. You should try 3.0.5. Maven 3.1.x is bad news all
around so far. There are tons of plugins that behave unpredictable and
sometimes outright wrong. Someone would need to spend quality time with the
pom, the plugin versions and the "compatibility matrix" (which is
incomplete and partially wrong) to ensure that the build works with maven
3.1.x. Does 3.1.x actually work with the JDK6?


> Maven home: C:\Java\apache-maven-3.1.1\bin\..
> Java version: 1.7.0_45, vendor: Oracle Corporation
> Java home: C:\Program Files\Java\jdk1.7.0_45\jre
>

You should try JDK6.


> Default locale: en_US, platform encoding: Cp1252
> OS name: "windows 7", version: "6.1", arch: "amd64", family: "windows"
>

I am sorry that I know nothing about Java on Windows.



Thanks for testing out the release! I am still a bit surprised that you
think I should build an actual 1.10 release from the release tag (in every
project that I ever worked on, the policy was that for a.b-RC<x>, one
builds artifacts that match this version and if the release passes, you
build a final a.b). But if the consensus is that from the a.b-RC<x> tag,
there should be an "a.b" artifact built, I am totally happy to do so. After
all, these are only bits.

Quality, as ludicrous as that sounds, is IMHO not a stopper for a release.
Same goes for the site IMHO. The site code is unchanged from the 1.9
release; if Apache policy has changed and there need to be changes put into
the site, I hope someone will either step up or point me at the necessary
changes any patch is appreciated. I wish I could spend significant time
chasing down what needs to be changed, but my window of opportunity to do
this release is slowly closing.

Thanks,
    Henning


> Gary
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 6:10 AM, Henning Schmiedehausen <
> henning@schmiedehausen.org> wrote:
>
> > [haven't done that in a long time. Please bear with me...]
> >
> > Bug fixes and minor enhancements from configuration 1.9.
> >
> > So I would like to release configuration 1.10.
> >
> > Configuration 1.10 RC1 is available for review here:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/configuration/ (svn
> > revision
> > 3321)
> >
> > Maven artifacts are here:
> >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-019/commons-configuration/commons-configuration/1.10-RC1/
> >
> > Details of changes since 1.9 are in the release notes:
> >
> >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/configuration/RELEASE-NOTES-1.10-RC1.txt
> > Changes file:
> >
> >
> http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/changes-report.html
> >
> > Site: http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/ (The
> JIRA
> > report will be fixed for the release)
> >
> > The tag is here:
> >
> >
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/proper/configuration/tags/CONFIGURATION_1_10RC1/(svn
> > revision 1534569)
> >
> > Clirr Report (compared to 1.9):
> >
> http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/clirr-report.html
> > RAT Report:
> > http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/rat-report.html
> >
> > KEYS: http://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
> >
> > Please review the release candidate and vote.
> >
> > This vote will close no sooner that 72 hours from now, i.e. after 1100
> GMT
> > 25-Oct 2013
> >
> > [ ] +1 Release these artifacts
> > [ ] +0 OK, but...
> > [ ] -0 OK, but really should fix...
> > [ ] -1 I oppose this release because...
> >
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
>
>
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition<
> http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message