logging-log4j-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christian Grobmeier <grobme...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release log4j 1.2.17
Date Thu, 03 May 2012 11:51:03 GMT
Hello Gary,

thanks for testing! Before I start commenting I want to mention it is
my first release and I don't know how exactly it was done before. Curt
(who did the past releases) did not comment so far.

> -1, mostly because of the missing bug fixed in the release notes page. Are
> there others?

I looked through changes, I am confused.

50486 is easy. It was "reopened" but I fixed it and now I closed it.
But:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49470
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43282

I have no clue about. I had the impression everything on the changes
list is fixed, but I was wrong.
We are able to put 1.2.17 out even without these two (?) issues. My
suggestion is to drop it from changes.xml.
Other opinions?

> http://people.apache.org/builds/logging/repo/log4j/log4j/ does not include
> bin and src zips (or tars if you like that) so I have to download the tag
> to test build.

Hm, yes we can really create that.
Before it seems these are the only artifacts we have created for older releases.

> *Build Issues*

Thats the tough part. I can build on mac osx 10.6 (except windows dll)
and Ubuntu (with windows dll).
I use Java 6 and Maven 2. These are the facts. Now I am totally
confused why you get such problems as described.
So far I think M2 is the only supported buildsystem (besides ant,
which i would like to drop).


>
> With Maven 2, I cannot build at all, which is fine if it is documented:
>
> [WARNING] Removing: javadoc from forked lifecycle, to prevent recursive
> invocation.

Thats ok, at least i have this warning but it builds all well.

> <snip>
> [INFO]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [ERROR] FATAL ERROR
> [INFO]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [INFO]
> org.apache.maven.doxia.siterenderer.sink.SiteRendererSink.figure(Lorg/apach=
> e/maven/doxia/sink/SinkEventAttributes;)V
> [INFO]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [INFO] Trace
> java.lang.AbstractMethodError:
> org.apache.maven.doxia.siterenderer.sink.SiteRendererSink.figure(Lorg/apach=
> e/maven/doxia/sin
>        at
> org.apache.maven.plugin.issues.AbstractIssuesReportGenerator.sinkFigure(Abs=
> tractIssuesReportGenerator.java:142)

Not a clue on that one.

> I use "mvn clean site" with:
>
> Apache Maven *2.2.1* (r801777; 2009-08-06 15:16:01-0400)
> Java version: 1.6.0_31
> Java home: C:\Program Files\Java\jdk1.6.0_31\jre
> Default locale: en_US, platform encoding: Cp1252
> OS name: "windows 7" version: "6.1" arch: "amd64" Family: "windows"

Same as me except i use osx

> - The build with M3 works aside from that. The tests pass but they are not
> invoked with "mvn site". This is odd to me because in Commons, the build
> for site calls test. It makes sense to me to fail the site build if the
> test fails. But this build does not include the same reports as Commons and
> looks to be a different beast all together.

Actually the build is 100% hell. mvn uses ant, ant uses mvn, all have
a non standard directory layout. And of course, you need to install
some windows layer to build on *nix.

> - For 2.0 we should have one build, Maven, and dump the Ant build file.

Not sure what 2.0 currently supports, but i think it is only maven.
For 1.0 I would LOVE if you could help me with cleaning the build. We
need to maintain it for a while...
we can vote on dropping ant support for 1.x whih should make things easier.

> *Site Issues*
>
> - Under "Release 1.2.17 - 2010-06-99", an entry is missing for
> https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D52913

Not sure what you mean?

> - In issue-tracking.html, the first Item should not be an "Overview" that
> we say we use Bugzilla. The most important thing on this page is the link
> to the Log4J Bugzilla page.
>  I would just remove the "Overview" section, it adds no value and delays me
> getting to the information I need. If you want to keep it, make the last
> section under a different title.

+1, lets remove it.

> - In license.html, the only section should be "The Apache Software License,
> Version 2.0", the stuff before it is just boilerplate noise.

+1

> - This is odd on the main page of the site, in plain text:
>
> --- Apache log4j=E2=84=A2 --- --- ---
>
> I do not get this when I download the tag and build.

It might be related because we are looking at it from svn. But I think
we can remove these lines,
I don't know what their intention is.

> - The Roadmap page has a similar problem (I do not get this when I download
> the tag and build.):
>
> ------ Apache log4j 1.2 Roadmap ------ ------ ------
>
> The road map should mention Log4J 2.0 and where is can be found and the
> state it is in at this time.

+1

> - Also (I do not get this when I download the tag and build.):
>
> ------ log4j 1.2 Publications ------ ------ ------
>
> - The Cross-reference Java source code looks weird because it points to
> pages instead of having links in the menu itself. I must be used to the
> Commons website generation! ;)

Not sure what you mean

> - For 2.0 I hope we can generate the same kind of reports we do for Commons
> like FindBugs, Clirr, PMD, Changes, and so on.

Yes, lets discuss this on another thread. SO far l4j2 and l4j1 are
totally separated. 2 is a full rewrite.

> - For 2.0 I hope we adopt the standard Maven directory layout.

me to. for 1.x we can try to fix that stuff a little bit. I analysed
it already, thread is somewher ein the archives.

> - The main Javadoc page shows some packages without package level
> documentation, which is kinda lame but not a show stopper.

Agreed. I would like to avoid writing it, instead using the power to
fix what needs to be fixed and go quickly to l4j2

OK... I will fix what I have marked above.
Are you willing to help with the new assembly packages or should we
leave that out for later?
my goal is to make a release to learn about the release cycle. Then we
have 2 RMs and the next version should be out quicker.

Cheers

>
> Gary
>
>
> On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 1:29 AM, Christian Grobmeier <grobmeier@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> please vote to release log4j 1.2.17.
>>
>> Artifacts:
>> http://people.apache.org/builds/logging/repo/log4j/log4j/
>>
>> Tag:
>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/logging/log4j/tags/log4j-1.2.17/
>>
>> Website:
>>
>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/logging/site/trunk/docs/log4j/1.2/index.html
>>
>> Please test carefully as this is my first log4j release.
>>
>> [] +1, release the artifacts
>> [] -1, don't release because
>>
>>
>> The vote will remain open for the usual 72 hours.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Christian
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> http://www.grobmeier.de
>> https://www.timeandbill.de
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
> JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: http://bit.ly/ECvg0
> Spring Batch in Action: http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory



-- 
http://www.grobmeier.de
https://www.timeandbill.de

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org


Mime
View raw message