Though those failing tests are annoying, I would not recommend ignoring those tests. We can manually ignore those test failures when we are testing stuff out though.
-Anshum > On Aug 28, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Adrien Grand <jpou...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into failures > when checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0 branch so that > building and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody working on this > release? > > Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 19:23, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com > <mailto:ansh...@apple.com>> a écrit : > Thanks Adrien! It worked with a fresh clone, at least ant check-licenses > worked, so I’m assuming the RC creation would work too. > I’m running that, and it might take a couple of hours for me to create one, > as a few SolrCloud tests are still a little flakey and they fail occasionally. > > -Anshum > > > >> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:13 AM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com >> <mailto:ansh...@apple.com>> wrote: >> >> Adrien, >> >> Yes, ant check-licenses fails with the same error, and so does ant validate >> (from the root dir). This is after running ant clean -f. >> >> BUILD FAILED >> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following error >> occurred while executing this line: >> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The following error >> occurred while executing this line: >> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62: JAR >> resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar >> >> I didn’t realize that the dependency was upgraded, and what confuses me is >> that the file actually exists. >> >> anshum$ ls analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-5 >> icu4j-56.1.jar icu4j-59.1.jar >> >> It seems like it’s something that git clean, ant clean clean-jars etc. >> didn’t fix. This is really surprising but I’ll try and checking out again >> and creating and RC (after checking for the dependencies). >> I think ant should be responsible for cleaning this up, and not git so >> there’s something off there. >> >> -Anshum >> >> >> >>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 8:51 AM, Adrien Grand <jpou...@gmail.com >>> <mailto:jpou...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> >>> You mentioned you tried to run the script multiple times. Have you run git >>> clean at some point? Maybe this is due to a stale working copy? >>> >>> Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 08:53, Adrien Grand <jpou...@gmail.com >>> <mailto:jpou...@gmail.com>> a écrit : >>> Hi Anshum, >>> >>> Does running ant check-licenses from the Lucene directory fail as well? The >>> error message that you are getting looks weird to me since Lucene 7.0 >>> depends on ICU 59.1, not 56.1 since >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7540 >>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7540>. >>> >>> Le ven. 25 août 2017 à 23:42, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com >>> <mailto:ansh...@apple.com>> a écrit : >>> A quick question, in case someone has an idea around what’s going on. When >>> I run the following command: >>> >>> python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/buildAndPushRelease.py --push-local >>> /Users/anshum/solr/release/7.0.0/rc0 --rc-num 1 --sign <my-key> >>> >>> I end up with the following error: >>> >>> BUILD FAILED >>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following error >>> occurred while executing this line: >>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The following >>> error occurred while executing this line: >>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62: JAR >>> resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar >>> >>> Any idea as to what’s going on? This generally fails after the tests have >>> run, and the script has processed for about 45 minutes and it’s consistent >>> i.e. all the times when the tests pass, the process fails with this warning. >>> >>> I can also confirm that this file exists at >>> lucene/analysis/icy/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar . >>> >>> Has anyone else seen this when working on the release? >>> >>> -Anshum >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Aug 23, 2017, at 4:21 AM, Andrzej Białecki >>>> <andrzej.biale...@lucidworks.com <mailto:andrzej.biale...@lucidworks.com>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> On 23 Aug 2017, at 13:06, Uwe Schindler <u...@thetaphi.de >>>>> <mailto:u...@thetaphi.de>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Keep in mind that there is also branch_7_0. >>>> >>>> Right, but the changes related to these issues were committed to master >>>> before branch_7_0 was created, and these specific issues are only about >>>> back-porting to 6x. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Uww >>>>> >>>>> Am 23. August 2017 12:26:42 MESZ schrieb "Andrzej Białecki" >>>>> <a...@getopt.org <mailto:a...@getopt.org>>: >>>>> >>>>>> On 23 Aug 2017, at 08:15, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com >>>>>> <mailto:ansh...@apple.com>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I also found more issues when comparing 7x, with 6x this time. I’ll take >>>>>> a look at wether it’s just the CHANGES entries or have these actually >>>>>> missed the branch. I assume it’s just the CHANGES, but want to be sure. >>>>>> If the committers involved can pitch in, I’d appreciate, else I’ll work >>>>>> on this for a bit right now and continue with this tomorrow morning. >>>>>> >>>>>> - SOLR-10477 (Ab) >>>>> >>>>> This is a partial back-port of relevant improvements from master to 6x, >>>>> so there are no strictly corresponding commits on 7x/master. >>>>> >>>>>> - SOLR-10631: Metric reporters leak on 6x. (Ab) >>>>> >>>>> This one has been fixed as part of other related issues in branches 7.x / >>>>> master, so it only required a specific fix for 6x. >>>>> >>>>>> - SOLR-10000 (Ab) >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> This has been committed first to 7x, then to 6x and it’s present in >>>>> branch_6_6. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> --- >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> >>>>> Andrzej Bialecki >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Uwe Schindler >>>>> Achterdiek 19, 28357 Bremen >>>>> https://www.thetaphi.de <https://www.thetaphi.de/> >>> >> >
