Ok, so I took the liberty of updating https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ReleaseNote70 <https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ReleaseNote70> with my changes Note that the previous version of the release notes can still be found at https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ReleaseNote70?action=info <https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ReleaseNote70?action=info> for reference
Joel, look at the bullet I re-added about Math expressions, feel free to jump in and modify now that it is in the Wiki. Cassandra, I totally agree about ref guide syncing and communicating one message. Also the practice of listing some of the major features introduced in 6.x is a good thing. If you have wording improvements to my summaries, please chime in, I’m not a technical writer :) And please, I was serious about choosing 7 major features and not adding random single improvements. The list has already creeped from 7 to 9 bullets. If you want to add something, then ask youself which of the other bullets that are less important to MOST USERS and then replace that bullet instead of adding more. Agree? -- Jan Høydahl, search solution architect Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com > 20. sep. 2017 kl. 14.34 skrev Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com>: > > Hi Jan, > > I added a note for Streaming Expressions in the comments. Could you add that > to the release notes? > > > > > Joel Bernstein > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ <http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/> > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 8:17 AM, David Smiley <david.w.smi...@gmail.com > <mailto:david.w.smi...@gmail.com>> wrote: > Excellent Jan! Editorial summaries should be the standard our users expect. > > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 7:51 AM Jan Høydahl <jan....@cominvent.com > <mailto:jan....@cominvent.com>> wrote: > I think the (Solr) release notes feels more like a dump of JIRA descriptions > than an editorial summary of main highlights. > People who want to dive deep can read CHANGES, let’s choose top-7 largest > changes, describe them editorially and refer to CHANGES for the rest > including upgrade notes? > > I made a total re-write here > https://gist.github.com/3afd5095834ee9e5d60b2eb304c21bec > <https://gist.github.com/3afd5095834ee9e5d60b2eb304c21bec> including a > general warning at the end that this is a major release that removes > deprecated stuff and that you should read the upgrade notes. > Anshum, feel free to disagree and discard or use at will! > > -- > Jan Høydahl, search solution architect > Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com <http://www.cominvent.com/> > >> 19. sep. 2017 kl. 22.44 skrev Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com >> <mailto:ansh...@apple.com>>: >> >> Please find the release notes here: >> >> Lucene: https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ReleaseNote70 >> <https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ReleaseNote70> >> >> Solr: https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ReleaseNote70 >> <https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ReleaseNote70> >> >> I am cleaning up the ‘upgrading from 6x’ section to make it shorter but feel >> free to either fix/add things to this. I pushed the artifacts last night so >> there are still about 8 hours to the 24 hours period. >> >> I’ll use the 8 hours to fix the website etc. and announce once all of this >> is wrapped up! >> >> -Anshum >> >> >> >>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:46 PM, Varun Thacker <va...@vthacker.in >>> <mailto:va...@vthacker.in>> wrote: >>> >>> I don't think holding up the release process infinitely till we stabilize >>> all the tests is an option. On the other hand getting an RC to build is >>> pretty difficult ( I am facing the same problem with 6.6.1 ) and I am sure >>> people will run into this while voting for the release? >>> >>> We could identify the top 2/3 tests which fail regularly while building the >>> RC and either disable them or see if someone volunteers to fix them ? >>> >>> On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 2:53 AM, Ishan Chattopadhyaya >>> <ichattopadhy...@gmail.com <mailto:ichattopadhy...@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? >>> >>> +1. If it is hampering the release process, I think we should either not >>> release without fixing them, or disable them for release (building, >>> verifying). >>> >>> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com >>> <mailto:ansh...@apple.com>> wrote: >>> 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 >>>> <mailto: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://maps.google.com/?q=Achterdiek+19,+28357+Bremen&entry=gmail&source=g> >>>>>>>> https://www.thetaphi.de <https://www.thetaphi.de/> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > -- > Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker > LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley > <http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley> | Book: > http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com > <http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com/>
