Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ant 1.10.12 based on RC1
On Sat, 2 Oct 2021 at 15:48, Gavin McDonald wrote: > > Please not that the ASF nor its projects release Binaries. > (They are provided to users as a convenience) > We also do not vote on releases based on Binaries. > > The vote should be based on whether or not the 'source' - that > is being released is good enough. > > Gav... > BCEL and commons-net dependency versions are not synced between libraries.properties and respective POMs. Gintas
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ant 1.10.12 based on RC1
On Thu, 7 Oct 2021 at 16:27, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>
> On 07/10/21 11:27 am, Gintautas Grigelionis wrote:
> > If the goal of 1.10.12 is to be compilable on Java 17,
>
> This 1.10.12 release of Ant (like our previous releases) is a bug fix
> release. Ant 1.10.x require a Java 8+ runtime. This release changes
> nothing on that front. One of the bug fixes in this release is a javadoc
> task fix that is only applicable for Java 17 - that's the only
> "relevance" of Java 17 to this release. Like previous 1.10.x releases we
> have been making sure users and projects using Ant can use Ant to build
> their projects using latest Java versions of their choice.
>
Apologies, I used "compilable" when I meant "buildable".
More precisely, Ant core cannot run all its unit tests on Java 17 without
optional dependendencies.
> > shouldn't unit tests
> > for script-related tasks in Ant core be complemented with an assumption
> > that Rhino, Nashorn or Graal JS is around?
>
> I'm not sure what kind of assumption you mean. Is there any specific
> test case you have in mind? Our CI jobs run against various versions of
> Java, including early access releases and even the recently released
> Java 17. None of our tests have shown any relevant failures in these
> releases. If this is more of a general suggestion for our test cases in
> Ant and if this doesn't have an impact on the vote of this release,
> please create a separate thread to discuss that.
>
Maven (POM) builds should run against a set of JDKs as well to demonstrate
my point.
The assumption should be coded like
assumeNotNull("JavaScript not present", new
ScriptEngineManager().getEngineByName("javascript"));
Gintas
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ant 1.10.12 based on RC1
On 07/10/21 11:27 am, Gintautas Grigelionis wrote: If the goal of 1.10.12 is to be compilable on Java 17, This 1.10.12 release of Ant (like our previous releases) is a bug fix release. Ant 1.10.x require a Java 8+ runtime. This release changes nothing on that front. One of the bug fixes in this release is a javadoc task fix that is only applicable for Java 17 - that's the only "relevance" of Java 17 to this release. Like previous 1.10.x releases we have been making sure users and projects using Ant can use Ant to build their projects using latest Java versions of their choice. shouldn't unit tests for script-related tasks in Ant core be complemented with an assumption that Rhino, Nashorn or Graal JS is around? I'm not sure what kind of assumption you mean. Is there any specific test case you have in mind? Our CI jobs run against various versions of Java, including early access releases and even the recently released Java 17. None of our tests have shown any relevant failures in these releases. If this is more of a general suggestion for our test cases in Ant and if this doesn't have an impact on the vote of this release, please create a separate thread to discuss that. -Jaikiran - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ant 1.10.12 based on RC1
Hello Paul, On 05/10/21 2:27 pm, Paul King wrote: I was surprised to see binary jars in the src archives under lib/optional. I don't know the history, so perhaps it is fine. Thank you for testing this release. I had a look at our previous releases and they too contain the binary jars in the source archives. So it appears to be historical. Having said that, the current release appears to include a few more binary jars in the source archive's lib/optional as compared to a previous release. I'll spend time on this tomorrow to see if that's OK or if I have to regenerate the source archives. Thank you very much for bringing it to attention. -Jaikiran - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org
