I think we'd gladly accept! If there's any we can do to help let us know. - Steve
On 7/3/19 7:51 AM, Christofer Dutz wrote: > I would be super happy to help with that. > As I have done this for about 5-6 other projects. > > Chris > > Holen Sie sichOutlook für Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36> > > ________________________________ > From: Steve Lawrence <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2019 1:34:14 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Release Daffodil 2.4.0 > > We are not. We should look into that. Ill create a ticket. > > On 7/3/19 7:32 AM, Christofer Dutz wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Aren't you using ASF Jenkins? >> >> Chris >> >> Holen Sie sichOutlook für Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36> >> >> ________________________________ >> From: Steve Lawrence <[email protected]> >> Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2019 1:26:15 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Release Daffodil 2.4.0 >> >> Thanks! >> >> Yeah, Travis CI hasn't been all that reliable. I never seen these hangs >> before on anything but it and restarting the build always seems to fix >> it. And it's difficult to debug so we don't have any shell access to >> Travis builds. >> >> I configured Azure Piplines to build commits to my fork and have never >> seen the freeze problem--I find it to be much more reliable. >> Unfortunately, azure currently requires write access to the repository >> so we can't enable it on the main repo, but we can always do it >> individually on our forks. >> >> - Steve >> >> On 7/2/19 10:46 PM, Sloane, Brandon wrote: >>> Sorry for the delay. I merged in 249 and 257. >>> >>> >>> I noticed an extra bit of flakiness with Travis on 249: >>> https://travis-ci.org/apache/incubator-daffodil/builds/553386320, where the >>> test just froze about 6 minutes in. Re-running the test resolved the issue, >>> so I am assuming it is a Travis issue, not a subtle bug in Daffodil. >>> Hopefully nothing worth thinking about, but something to keep an eye on if >>> it keeps happening. >>> >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> From: Steve Lawrence <[email protected]> >>> Sent: Tuesday, July 2, 2019 1:47:42 PM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Release Daffodil 2.4.0 >>> >>> Looks like you've just created a PR for this ticket, and the other ones >>> mentioned by Mike have been merged and resolved. So there are now just 3 >>> open pull requests to merge for 2.4.0: >>> >>> 249: Emit SDE when a type calculator attempts to use an undefined type. >>> 256: Bump version to 2.4.0 >>> 257: Daffodil 2165 type calc double functions >>> >>> I'll volunteer to be the release manager and start the process once >>> these three PRs are merged. Please review these ASAP, since holidays and >>> vacations are probably going to start happening and people will start >>> disappearing. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> - Steve >>> >>> On 6/26/19 1:29 PM, Sloane, Brandon wrote: >>>> I am working on DAFFODIL-2165 now. The solution I am pursuing changes the >>>> proposed functions for typeCalcs (instead of a seperate String/Int >>>> function, there is just a single function that automatically infers its >>>> return type). >>>> >>>> >>>> This involves a fair bit of plumbing to get information to where it needs >>>> to be in the compiler, which might or might not involve significant work >>>> avoid circular dependencies. >>>> >>>> >>>> It would be nice to have this make it into the next release; but the >>>> typeCalc stuff is experimental, so it shouldn't be an issue for us to make >>>> breaking changes to it after the release. >>>> >>>> ________________________________ >>>> From: Steve Lawrence <[email protected]> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2019 8:42:53 AM >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Subject: [DISCUSS] Release Daffodil 2.4.0 >>>> >>>> We've added a lot of good features and bug fixes to Daffodil since the >>>> 2.3.0 release, and it's about that time where we need to start thinking >>>> about getting the next release out. >>>> >>>> One bug I would like to get resolved is DAFFODIL-2163, which I think I >>>> can track down this week. Are there any other issues that people think >>>> should be resolved for 2.4.0? >>>> >>>> Maybe we can start the release process next week? >>>> >>>> - Steve >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > >
