rave-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ate Douma <...@douma.nu>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Rave 0.18 Release Candidate
Date Wed, 05 Dec 2012 09:41:23 GMT
On 12/05/2012 03:39 AM, Franklin, Matthew B. wrote:
> I haven't reviewed the release, but I agree that we should push forward with the known
issue. I would also like to see if this is an issue in earlier releases.
>
Well, I checked two earlier versions (0.15 & 0.16). I cannot reproduce the error 
with those, but because I cannot delete a user at all, regardless having a 
shared page or not.
When I try to delete any user I get an exception (see below).
Maybe that is related to H2 database only, but worrisome anyway.
At least with 0.18 we now *can* delete users :)

Anyway, I agree not making RAVE-859 a release blocker, but we need spend more 
time and focus on these basic model management issues.

I'll vote +1 on the release now, but we should mentioned RAVE-859 as known issue.

Ate

FYI the exception stacktrace when trying to delete a user with 0.15/0.16:

INFO : org.apache.rave.portal.service.impl.DefaultUserService - about to delete 
userId: 2
INFO : org.apache.rave.portal.service.impl.DefaultUserService - Deleted user 
[2,john.doe] - numPages: 2, numPersonPages:0, numWidgetComments: 0, 
numWidgetRatings: 0, numWidgetsOwned: 0,numCategoriesTouched:0
Dec 5, 2012 9:55:27 AM org.apache.catalina.core.StandardWrapperValve invoke
SEVERE: Servlet.service() for servlet dispatcher threw exception
org.apache.rave.persistence.impl.TranslatedH2Exception: Unknown Database Error
	at 
org.apache.rave.persistence.jpa.impl.H2OpenJpaDialect.translateExceptionIfPossible(H2OpenJpaDialect.java:60)
	at 
org.springframework.orm.jpa.JpaTransactionManager.doCommit(JpaTransactionManager.java:516)
	at 
org.springframework.transaction.support.AbstractPlatformTransactionManager.processCommit(AbstractPlatformTransactionManager.java:754)
	at 
org.springframework.transaction.support.AbstractPlatformTransactionManager.commit(AbstractPlatformTransactionManager.java:723)
	at 
org.springframework.transaction.interceptor.TransactionAspectSupport.commitTransactionAfterReturning(TransactionAspectSupport.java:394)
	at 
org.springframework.transaction.interceptor.TransactionInterceptor.invoke(TransactionInterceptor.java:120)
	at 
org.springframework.aop.framework.ReflectiveMethodInvocation.proceed(ReflectiveMethodInvocation.java:172)
	at 
org.springframework.aop.framework.JdkDynamicAopProxy.invoke(JdkDynamicAopProxy.java:202)
	at $Proxy132.deleteUser(Unknown Source)
	at 
org.apache.rave.portal.web.controller.admin.UserController.deleteUserDetail(UserController.java:161)


>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Geer [chris@cxtsoftware.com<mailto:chris@cxtsoftware.com>]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 08:52 PM Eastern Standard Time
> To: dev@rave.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Rave 0.18 Release Candidate
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 5:35 PM, Ate Douma <ate@douma.nu> wrote:
>
>> I tested the 0.18 release and all-in-all it works pretty fine.
>> The performance on H2 still is an issue of course but not blocking
>> (RAVE-838).
>> Also, RAVE-845 seems to be fixed, deleting a user with friend associations
>> now works.
>>
>> However I discovered a new, and IMO worse error RAVE-859: when I delete a
>> user who has pages shared with, that action also deletes those shared pages
>> which aren't 'owned' by this user. Rather destructive...
>>
>> I'm not sure we should qualify this as a release blocker, as we already
>> canceled the previous release candidate, but *functionally* it certainly
>> qualifies. I don't know if anyone (yet) is using this feature in an
>> (almost) production environment, but if so then they should *not* upgrade
>> to this 0.18 release candidate until this bug is fixed.
>> Or, well, maybe previous releases also had this bug already (I haven't had
>> time to check) in which case it doesn't really matter.
>>
>> WDYT: should we accept this as a known/recognized bug (and then highlight
>> this in the release announcement) or qualify this as a release blocker?
>>
>
> I vote that we proceed with the release and put a note not to upgrade if
> you use this feature. That way people who don't use the feature get an
> upgrade and the people who do use it are not any worse off as long as they
> don't upgrade.
>
> Two questions on RAVE-859
>   - Do you know if it's a logic error (we are purposely deleting the page)
> or is it an unintended JPA delete based on referential integrity?
>   - How will your work on the HMVC impact pages and page sharing? Will it
> fix this issue by replacing it with a different approach?
>
> If we can get concurrence on RAVE-859 then here is my +1
>
> Chris
>
>>
>> I'm holding off voting +1/-1 for now.
>>
>> Ate
>>
>>
>>
>> On 12/02/2012 05:34 AM, Raminderjeet Singh wrote:
>>
>>> Discussion thread for vote on 0.18 release candidate.
>>>
>>> For more information on the release process, checkout -
>>> http://www.apache.org/dev/**release.html<http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html>
>>>
>>> Some of the things to check before voting are:
>>> - can you run the demo binaries
>>> - can you build the contents of source-release.zip and svn tag
>>> - do all of the staged jars/zips contain the required LICENSE and NOTICE
>>> files
>>> - are all of the staged artifacts signed and the signature verifiable
>>> - is the signing key in the project's KEYS file and on a public server
>>>
>>>
>>


Mime
View raw message