lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Varun Thacker <va...@vthacker.in>
Subject Re: 7.0 Release Update
Date Mon, 21 Aug 2017 08:27:15 GMT
Hi Anshum,

SOLR-11228 was the only fix which I ported from 7.1 to both branch_6_6 and
branch_7_0 . I don't plan on backporting any other changes from 7.1 to 6.6.1

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Uwe Schindler <uwe@thetaphi.de> wrote:

> Hi Anshum,
>
>
>
> I’d like to get https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-8689 in, it’s
> marked as blocker. It would be a bit embarrassing, if we release Solr 7
> approximately at same time like Java 9 and it does not work on our
> supported platforms. On Linux it works since beginning of this year, but
> the windows shell scripts were broken. I am just waiting for comments on
> this issue about the GC log file handling (unfortunately, I have to ignore
> custom GC_LOG_OPTS on Java 9, because the windows shell does not allow to
> rewrite the arguments in the same way like UNIX allows with reg exes).
>
>
>
> Yesterday (before your mail), I already backported a Hadoop 2.7.2 -> 2.7.4
> update, so it works now with Java 9. This made the ugly workaround obsolete
> (changing java.version sysprop temporarily). This fix is now in 6.6.1 and
> 7.0 branch.
>
>
>
> Uwe
>
>
>
> -----
>
> Uwe Schindler
>
> Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen
>
> http://www.thetaphi.de
>
> eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
>
>
>
> *From:* Anshum Gupta [mailto:anshum@anshumgupta.net]
> *Sent:* Monday, August 21, 2017 3:31 AM
> *To:* dev@lucene.apache.org
> *Subject:* Re: 7.0 Release Update
>
>
>
> Let's not commit more stuff to 7.0, unless it's a blocker as it gets hard
> to track.
>
> At this time, the only commits that would be going in to 7.0 are the ones
> that Varun spoke to me about back porting.
>
> Once that is done, I'll cut an RC (most likely tomorrow). In the
> meanwhile, I'll work on the release notes, and making sure that the CHANGES
> are good for 7.0.
>
>
>
> Anshum
>
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 8:33 AM Ishan Chattopadhyaya <
> ichattopadhyaya@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I've added SOLR-11183 to the release branch. Please let me know if someone
> has any concerns.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ishan
>
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 5:55 PM, Yonik Seeley <yseeley@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I opened https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-11262
> I don't know if it has implications for 7.0 or not.
>
> From the issue:
> """This means that any code using PushWriter (via MapWriter or
> IteratorWriter) will be broken if one tries to use XML response
> format. This may easily go unnoticed if one is not using XML response
> format in testing (JSON or binary is frequently used)."""
>
>
> -Yonik
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 5:14 AM, Noble Paul <noble.paul@gmail.com> wrote:
> > sorry for the last minute notice. I need to fix the folowing as well.
> > It may take a few hours
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-11239
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 6:41 AM, Andrzej Białecki
> > <andrzej.bialecki@lucidworks.com> wrote:
> >> Then, if I may be so bold, I’d like to slip in SOLR-11235, which is a
> simple
> >> AlreadyClosedException prevention fix. Patch is ready, tests are
> passing.
> >>
> >> On 14 Aug 2017, at 19:17, Anshum Gupta <anshum@anshumgupta.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> Thanks Ab.
> >>
> >> I'll cut an RC on Wednesday, so that both, I get the time, and also
> that the
> >> tests get some time on Jenkins.
> >>
> >> Anshum
> >>
> >> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 5:29 AM Andrzej Białecki
> >> <andrzej.bialecki@lucidworks.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I’ve committed the fix for SOLR-11221 to branch_7_0 (and branch_7x and
> >>> master).
> >>>
> >>> On 12 Aug 2017, at 02:20, Andrzej Białecki
> >>> <andrzej.bialecki@lucidworks.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi Anshum,
> >>>
> >>> The patch for SOLR-11221 is ready, with one caveat - it required larger
> >>> changes than I thought, so there’s a sizeable chunk of new code that
> is not
> >>> so well tested… I added a test that used to fail without this change,
> and
> >>> manual testing confirms that metrics are now correctly reported after
> core
> >>> reloads.
> >>>
> >>> We could postpone this fix to 7.0.1 if there are objections, but I
> think
> >>> it should go in to 7.0 - without the fix JMX reporting is surely
> broken,
> >>> with the fix it’s only a possibility ;)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 11 Aug 2017, at 19:59, Anshum Gupta <anshum@anshumgupta.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for the report Mark!
> >>>
> >>> and yes, I'll wait until the JMX issue is fixed.
> >>>
> >>> Anshum
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 9:49 AM Mark Miller <markrmiller@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Yeah, let's not release a major version with JMX monitoring broken.
> >>>>
> >>>> Here is a 30 run test report for the 7.0 branch:
> >>>> http://apache-solr-7-0.bitballoon.com/20170811
> >>>>
> >>>> - Mark
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 4:02 PM Tomas Fernandez Lobbe <
> tflobbe@apple.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Lets fix it before releasing. I’d hate to release with a known
> critical
> >>>>> bug.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Aug 10, 2017, at 12:54 PM, Anshum Gupta <anshum@anshumgupta.net>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi Ab,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> How quickly are we talking about? If you suggest, we could wait,
> >>>>> depending upon the impact, and the time required to fix it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Anshum
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 12:28 PM Andrzej Białecki
> >>>>> <andrzej.bialecki@lucidworks.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I just discovered SOLR-11221, which basically breaks JMX
> monitoring. We
> >>>>>> could either release with “known issues” and then quickly
do 7.0.1,
> or wait
> >>>>>> until it’s fixed.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 10 Aug 2017, at 18:55, Mark Miller <markrmiller@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I'll generate a test report for the 7.0 branch tonight so we
can
> >>>>>> evaluate that for an rc as well.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> - Mark
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 1:32 PM Anshum Gupta <anshum@anshumgupta.net
> >
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Good news!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I don't see any 'blockers' for 7.0 anymore, which means,
after
> giving
> >>>>>>> Jenkins a couple of days, I'll cut out an RC. I intend to
do this
> on
> >>>>>>> Wednesday/Thursday, unless a blocker comes up, which I hope
> shouldn't be the
> >>>>>>> case.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Anshum
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 4:02 PM Steve Rowe <sarowe@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I worked through the list of issues with the
> >>>>>>>> "numeric-tries-to-points” label and marked those as
7.0 Blocker
> that seemed
> >>>>>>>> reasonable, on the assumption that we should at a minimum
give
> clear error
> >>>>>>>> messages for points non-compatibility.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> If others don’t agree with the Blocker assessments
I’ve made, I’m
> >>>>>>>> willing to discuss on the issues.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I plan on starting to work on the remaining 7.0 blockers
now.  I
> >>>>>>>> would welcome assistance in clearing them up.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Here’s a JIRA query to see just the remaining 7.0
blockers, of
> which
> >>>>>>>> there are currently 12:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project+in+(
> SOLR,LUCENE)+AND+fixVersion=7.0+AND+priority=Blocker+AND+
> resolution=Unresolved>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> Steve
> >>>>>>>> www.lucidworks.com
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> > On Jul 25, 2017, at 2:41 PM, Anshum Gupta <
> anshum@anshumgupta.net>
> >>>>>>>> > wrote:
> >>>>>>>> >
> >>>>>>>> > I will *try* to get to it, but can't confirm. If
someone else
> has a
> >>>>>>>> > spare cycle and can take it up before I get to
it, please do.
> >>>>>>>> >
> >>>>>>>> > -Anshum
> >>>>>>>> >
> >>>>>>>> > On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 10:44 AM Cassandra Targett
> >>>>>>>> > <casstargett@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> > I believe the only remaining blocker to SOLR-10803
(to mark all
> >>>>>>>> > Trie*
> >>>>>>>> > fields as deprecated) is SOLR-11023, which Hoss
was working on.
> As
> >>>>>>>> > he
> >>>>>>>> > noted last night, he is off for vacation for the
next 2 weeks.
> Is
> >>>>>>>> > anyone else available to work on it so 7.0 isn't
stalled for 2+
> >>>>>>>> > more
> >>>>>>>> > weeks?
> >>>>>>>> >
> >>>>>>>> > Now would also be a good time to look over any
other bugs with
> >>>>>>>> > PointFields and make a case if any should be considered
blockers
> >>>>>>>> > for
> >>>>>>>> > 7.0. I think they all share a label:
> >>>>>>>> >
> >>>>>>>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=status%20%3D%
> 20Open%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20numeric-tries-to-points
> >>>>>>>> >
> >>>>>>>> > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Chris Hostetter
> >>>>>>>> > <hossman_lucene@fucit.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> > >
> >>>>>>>> > > : So, my overall point is that if A) we agree
that we want to
> >>>>>>>> > > deprecate
> >>>>>>>> > > : Trie* numeric fields, and B) we want to
hold up the 7.0
> release
> >>>>>>>> > > until
> >>>>>>>> > > : that's done, it's more than just updating
the example
> schemas
> >>>>>>>> > > if we
> >>>>>>>> > > : want to ensure a quality app for users.
We still need to fix
> >>>>>>>> > > the tests
> >>>>>>>> > > : and also fix bugs that are going to be really
painful for
> >>>>>>>> > > users. And
> >>>>>>>> > > : to get all that done soon, we definitely
need some more
> >>>>>>>> > > volunteers.
> >>>>>>>> > >
> >>>>>>>> > > I've beefed up the description of SOLR-10807
with tips on how
> >>>>>>>> > > people can
> >>>>>>>> > > help out...
> >>>>>>>> > >
> >>>>>>>> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10807
> >>>>>>>> > >
> >>>>>>>> > >
> >>>>>>>> > >
> >>>>>>>> > > -Hoss
> >>>>>>>> > > http://www.lucidworks.com/
> >>>>>>>> > >
> >>>>>>>> > >
> >>>>>>>> > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
> >>>>>>>> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> >>>>>>>> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >>>>>>>> > >
> >>>>>>>> >
> >>>>>>>> >
> >>>>>>>> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
> >>>>>>>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> >>>>>>>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >>>>>>>> >
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
> >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> >>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> - Mark
> >>>>>> about.me/markrmiller
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> - Mark
> >>>> about.me/markrmiller
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > -----------------------------------------------------
> > Noble Paul
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
>
>

Mime
View raw message