Hi, It's still not clear to me what 1.5.1 is going to look like. Will it be current trunk incl. the script bugfix or just 1.5 plus the bugfix? I would vote for the latter as it makes more sense for a bugfix release.
There is another debate behind this, in my opinion, about freezing trunk prior to releases and thus stopping active development. This has been an issue in the past. Is this something for another thread? Thanks, Markus -----Original message----- > From:Lewis John Mcgibbney <lewis.mcgibb...@gmail.com> > Sent: Thu 21-Jun-2012 22:10 > To: dev@nutch.apache.org > Subject: Re: [jira] [Commented] (NUTCH-1341) NotModified time set to now but > page not modified > > OK if we agree on this then I will certainly do this on Saturday. > > I'll also roll 2.0 #RC2 > > Are we agreed? > > Lewis > > On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 1:49 PM, Markus Jelsma > <markus.jel...@openindex.io> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I would tend to think that creating a new tag or branch from 1.5 and > > manually patching 1.5.1 with the bugfix. This means no merging is required > > and 1.5.1 will only contain the neccesary fixes and no changes/features or > > new bugs. > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > -----Original message----- > >> From:Lewis John Mcgibbney <lewis.mcgibb...@gmail.com> > >> Sent: Thu 21-Jun-2012 14:41 > >> To: dev@nutch.apache.org > >> Subject: Re: [jira] [Commented] (NUTCH-1341) NotModified time set to now > >> but page not modified > >> > >> Mmmm. > >> > >> I suppose I could merge the changes from trunk to branch-1.5, then tag > >> it and produce the RC from that? > >> > >> wdyt? > >> > >> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Markus Jelsma > >> <markus.jel...@openindex.io> wrote: > >> > Hi guys, > >> > > >> > You're about to release 1.5.1 from trunk? That doesn't make sense as it > >> > already contains quite some changes. It would, in my opinion, be best to > >> > bugfix 1.5 with only the issues that matter such as the broken nutch > >> > script and not use trunk for it but the 1.5 tag or branch in svn. It > >> > bothers a bit, this also happened during the freeze prior to the 1.5 > >> > and 1.4 release where we could not properly continue work on trunk. > >> > > >> > What do you think? > >> > Thanks > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -----Original message----- > >> >> From:Julien Nioche (JIRA) <j...@apache.org> > >> >> Sent: Thu 21-Jun-2012 13:53 > >> >> To: dev@nutch.apache.org > >> >> Subject: [jira] [Commented] (NUTCH-1341) NotModified time set to now > >> >> but page not modified > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> [ > >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NUTCH-1341?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13398362#comment-13398362 > >> >> ] > >> >> > >> >> Julien Nioche commented on NUTCH-1341: > >> >> -------------------------------------- > >> >> > >> >> Let's release 1.5.1 first then add new -bugs- (sorry) functionalities > >> >> later for 1.6 > >> >> > >> >> > NotModified time set to now but page not modified > >> >> > ------------------------------------------------- > >> >> > > >> >> > Key: NUTCH-1341 > >> >> > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NUTCH-1341 > >> >> > Project: Nutch > >> >> > Issue Type: Bug > >> >> > Affects Versions: 1.5 > >> >> > Reporter: Markus Jelsma > >> >> > Assignee: Markus Jelsma > >> >> > Fix For: 1.6 > >> >> > > >> >> > Attachments: NUTCH-1341-1.6-1.patch > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > Servers tend to respond with incorrect or no value for LastModified. > >> >> > By comparing signatures or when (fetch.getStatus() == > >> >> > CrawlDatum.STATUS_FETCH_NOTMODIFIED) the reducer correctly sets the > >> >> > db_notmodified status for the CrawlDatum. The modifiedTime value, > >> >> > however, is not set accordingly. > >> >> > >> >> -- > >> >> This message is automatically generated by JIRA. > >> >> If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA > >> >> administrators: > >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa > >> >> For more information on JIRA, see: > >> >> http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Lewis > >> > > > > -- > Lewis >
