Thanks! just pinged her on Twitter

--

Itamar Syn-Hershko
http://code972.com | @synhershko <https://twitter.com/synhershko>
Freelance Developer & Consultant
Lucene.NET committer and PMC member

On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 12:24 AM, Kevin Miller <[email protected]> wrote:

> Annie helps with the care and feeding of the CodeBetter TeamCity server.
> Reach out to her on Twitter and she will get you some help.
>
>
>
>
> "They can certainly contact me-I can either help or I can put them in
> contact with people who can help.”
>
>
>
>
>
>
> https://twitter.com/ajepst/status/588448988367433728
>
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Wyatt Barnett <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Sorry, my alter ego Wade and I just got back in town here.
> > I'm looking into the NuGet feed setup though I need to talk to someone
> over
> > at CodeBetter.com as some things need to be enabled and I need to figure
> > out where the artifacts. I know Martin has moved on from JetBrains, is
> > there another contact?
> > To answer your question, no we don't need to wait on passing builds -- we
> > can tell it to build the nuget regardless. We should probably talk about
> > what should trigger a nuget release -- probably every build is too much.
> > Maybe nightly builds for now?
> > On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 5:20 PM Itamar Syn-Hershko <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >> Ok, I just looked and the nuget feed is empty - probably because there
> was
> >> never a green build. Can we have nuget artifacts already, at least
> until we
> >> have green builds?
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> Itamar Syn-Hershko
> >> http://code972.com | @synhershko <https://twitter.com/synhershko>
> >> Freelance Developer & Consultant
> >> Lucene.NET committer and PMC member
> >>
> >> On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 12:15 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <
> [email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Errr.. I mean Wyatt :)
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> >
> >> > Itamar Syn-Hershko
> >> > http://code972.com | @synhershko <https://twitter.com/synhershko>
> >> > Freelance Developer & Consultant
> >> > Lucene.NET committer and PMC member
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 12:15 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <
> [email protected]
> >> >
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hi Wade, any luck?
> >> >>
> >> >> Is there a nuget feed on the build server we can start using to
> install
> >> >> the core / subproject pieces using nuget from?
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks!
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >>
> >> >> Itamar Syn-Hershko
> >> >> http://code972.com | @synhershko <https://twitter.com/synhershko>
> >> >> Freelance Developer & Consultant
> >> >> Lucene.NET committer and PMC member
> >> >>
> >> >> On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 1:53 AM, Wyatt Barnett <
> [email protected]>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Yup that makes sense -- somehow I conflated sub projects over to
> >> contrib
> >> >>> which I haven't seen any movement.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I'm on the road at the moment but I'll see about getting the
> remaining
> >> >>> sub
> >> >>> projects setup and building, auditing the ignores and start banging
> on
> >> >>> nuget when I get back to the ranch.
> >> >>> On Apr 8, 2015 5:42 PM, "Itamar Syn-Hershko" <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> > inline
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > --
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > Itamar Syn-Hershko
> >> >>> > http://code972.com | @synhershko <https://twitter.com/synhershko>
> >> >>> > Freelance Developer & Consultant
> >> >>> > Lucene.NET committer and PMC member
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 1:09 AM, Wyatt Barnett <
> >> [email protected]
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > wrote:
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > > Thanks for the update Itamar -- this sounds exciting.
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > > A few notes / questions from the build side of things here:
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > > First, I'm not as hung up on persistently failing tests as the
> >> tests
> >> >>> we
> >> >>> > get
> >> >>> > > intermittent failures on. I suspect some of the below will
> address
> >> >>> this.
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > Yup
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > > Second, what do we want to do about the 112 or so ignored
> tests? I
> >> >>> think
> >> >>> > > some are marked as long-running via the [LongRunningTest]
> attribute
> >> >>> but
> >> >>> > > there are probably some ignored failures in that mix.
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > I guess that should be another task someone needs to take - can
> you
> >> >>> try and
> >> >>> > categorize them? some I know are JVM specfic tests that don't
> apply
> >> to
> >> >>> > Lucene.NET
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > > Third, regarding the sub-projects, what does the structure look
> >> like
> >> >>> so I
> >> >>> > > can get that integrated into the TeamCity setup? Or should I
> noodle
> >> >>> on it
> >> >>> > > and propose one?
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > What do you mean? See here
> >> >>> > https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/tree/master/src
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > Every subproject has a test suite that needs to be run, and should
> >> >>> produce
> >> >>> > a class library that we could push to nuget when we release. Until
> >> >>> then we
> >> >>> > should be able to allow people to install via nuget from our build
> >> >>> server's
> >> >>> > feed.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > As far as dependencies and build triggers - that should be obvious
> >> and
> >> >>> self
> >> >>> > explanatory..
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > Does that make sense?
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > > Thanks for all the help from everyone getting things this far.
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > > On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 1:07 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <
> >> >>> [email protected]>
> >> >>> > > wrote:
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > > > Hey all,
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > > We are nearly there -- we are this close to a release!
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > > We have only about 30 failing tests now in the core, and I'd
> like
> >> >>> to
> >> >>> > push
> >> >>> > > > hard during the next few days so we can get a beta out next
> week.
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > > I'd appreciate your help with this!
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > > I've narrowed down several failing tests that require some
> >> >>> digging, if
> >> >>> > > > folks can assign those to themselves and send us PRs fixing
> those
> >> >>> > tests,
> >> >>> > > > that would help a lot!
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > > 1.
> Lucene.Net.Search.TestNumericRangeQuery32.TestInfiniteValues
> >> ()
> >> >>> > > > and
> Lucene.Net.Search.TestNumericRangeQuery64.TestInfiniteValues
> >> ()
> >> >>> --
> >> >>> > > > specifically it seems like Double and Float NaNs are treated
> >> >>> > differently
> >> >>> > > > between C# and Java and therefore the failing tests. Or there
> is
> >> a
> >> >>> bug
> >> >>> > in
> >> >>> > > > the inner implementation handling those queries.
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > > 2. TestLucene40DocValuesFormat has a few failing tests,
> probably
> >> >>> > exposing
> >> >>> > > > data corruption in one of the codec components. I believe
> this is
> >> >>> > > contained
> >> >>> > > > in the 40DocValues tests so the scope isn't huge but I could
> be
> >> >>> wrong.
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > > 3. TestLucene42DocValuesFormat has two tests failing with
> output
> >> of
> >> >>> > lines
> >> >>> > > > like "Fail: frozenHash=182658 vs h=5124052". Something is off
> in
> >> >>> > > computing
> >> >>> > > > the hashes of the nodes, or maybe the node construction is
> faulty
> >> >>> > (which
> >> >>> > > is
> >> >>> > > > a serious bug). Hashing is done in Lucene.Net.Fst.NodeHash<T>,
> >> >>> that'll
> >> >>> > > be a
> >> >>> > > > good starting point. Also see
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/commit/ea7cfe6972972f910
> >> 90d995c729689fff9a0f54c
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > > 4. There seem to be some concurrency issues with file
> handling,
> >> >>> > probably
> >> >>> > > on
> >> >>> > > > the part that is in charge of acquiring and releasing locks.
> In
> >> >>> > > particular
> >> >>> > > > see TestDocValuesFormat,
> >> >>> > > > .TestShardSearching.TestSimple(),
> >> >>> > > > TestBufferedIndexInput.TestSetBufferSize(),
> >> >>> > > > TestLockFactory.TestStressLocks(),
> >> >>> > > > TestLockFactory.TestStressLocksNativeFSLockFactory()
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > > 5. RegexpQuery seems to be broken, I believe the underlying
> >> >>> automaton
> >> >>> > > > implementation doesn't emit the terms correctly. See the
> failures
> >> >>> in
> >> >>> > > > TestRegexpQuery and TestRegexpRandom.
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > > 6. Similar but probably unrelated failing test is
> >> >>> > > > at TestSpanMultiTermQueryWrapper.TestFuzzy2()
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > > 7. An interesting failure to investigate is here:
> >> >>> > > > TestIndexableBinaryStringTools.TestEncodedSortability() --
> >> >>> probably a
> >> >>> > > > simple porting fail, a subtle Java <--> C# mismatch that we
> >> haven't
> >> >>> > > > noticed.
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > > Additionally, any help with porting the subprojects would be
> >> great.
> >> >>> > Some
> >> >>> > > > folks took some subprojects under their wings and never
> reported
> >> >>> back.
> >> >>> > If
> >> >>> > > > you could either complete the work, or donate whatever you
> have
> >> >>> done so
> >> >>> > > > far, that would be great.
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > > As always, get the code from here:
> >> >>> https://github.com/apache/lucenenet
> >> >>> > > --
> >> >>> > > > work on your fork and send us a PR when ready, with a good
> >> >>> description
> >> >>> > of
> >> >>> > > > what you've done.
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > > To see the list of currently failing tests in real-time, go
> here
> >> >>> (you
> >> >>> > can
> >> >>> > > > login as guest):
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> http://teamcity.codebetter.com/viewType.html?buildTypeId=Luc
> >> eneNet_Core&branch_LuceneNet=%3Cdefault%3E&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > > Thanks, and happy searching,
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > > --
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > > Itamar Syn-Hershko
> >> >>> > > > http://code972.com | @synhershko <
> https://twitter.com/synhershko
> >> >
> >> >>> > > > Freelance Developer & Consultant
> >> >>> > > > Lucene.NET committer and PMC member
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
>

Reply via email to