The only places refering to 2.1.0 are downloads.xml and "release notes" first one will be changed in trunk only (to provide link to the latest version) second will be updated during release process.
I'm going to pack 2.1.1RC1 tonight Please NOTE I'll be on vacation 2013.06.12-2013.06.23 with none internet connection (or maybe with access to email only) On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 3:14 AM, [email protected] <[email protected] > wrote: > Hi folks, > > I agree on point no 5 with Maxim: > *auto > reconnect feature stopped to work long ago* > => There was never such a feature. It is also rather complicated, cause > reconnect means that you basically out of sync, and the application has no > idea what has happened in between, so in theory you could have a reconnect > after 2 hours and the entire list of participants, screensharing, > whiteboards, et cetera _everything_ has changed. So the only chance I see > to realize a *reconnect* is to actually re-login the user into the room and > load everything from scratch. > > But about this entire discussion: > Why is this discussion in the private list at all? > There is no *privileged* channel to request or discuss features and bugs. > Please, lets use the dev list and give everyone that would like to be > involved the chance to at least read what you have to say. > @Alexei: For instance anybody reading the Analytics (or error > infrastructure :)) question now, is missing the context as how this email > that you wrote was initiated. > > Thanks, > Sebastian > > > 2013/6/7 Maxim Solodovnik <[email protected]> > > > 1) video codec was switched in 2.1.0, this is bug fix release I'm sure we > > shouldn't add major changes. Additionally we will need to use h264 in > > 3.0/3.1 since it is html5 compatible. > > > > 2) this behavior was not changed since 2.0. Please file an issue (better > > with patch) if you feel this need to be changed. (I would add > configuration > > value default_gain with default value == 50) > > > > 3) I'll doublecheck > > > > 4) according to VOTE rules every user voting for release must perform > these > > tests > > > > 5) I would vote for adding NOTE regarding flash version to release notes > of > > 2.1.1 and alert to 3.0 (on room enter). Actually auto reconnect works as > > before .... it is just don't reconnect into room :) > > You can file JIRA issue (better with patch), but to be fair I don't > really > > like such "last minute" changes. The release was announced long time ago > > and I feel we should close this branch and focus on 3.0 > > On Jun 6, 2013 7:23 PM, "Alexei Fedotov" <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Maxim, I've looked through the changes: > > > https://gist.github.com/leshikus/5720534 > > > most of them relate to log improvements, thus harmless. > > > > > > Here are few points on 2.1.1 release: > > > > > > 1. We haven't carefully tested H.264. Our customers use H.263 because > > > H.264 didn't work well for them. H,254 is a default codec for a new > > > release. Won't this be a problem? > > > > > > 2. There are hardcoded microphone settings for silence level, gain, > > > etc. From the other side I noticed that for the new release microphone > > > sensitivity is low, and one needs to set the sensitivity bar to the > > > maximum every time to get it to normal. Or this can be also related to > > > codec. > > > > > > 3. There are several places which incorrectly refer to "2.1.0" and > > > "2.0". The only place where the release is correct is a build file. > > > > > > 4. Who will volunteer to pass all tests for the new release, > > > xdocs/ManualTesting.xml? > > > > > > 5. Our users believe that reliability is most important part of > > > conferences. The last flash version does not work well, and auto > > > reconnect feature stopped to work long ago. How this can be addressed? > > > Should a flash version check be added (against flash 11.6 and 11.7), > > > and auto reconnect fixed? > > > > > > -- > > > With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями, > > > Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов, > > > http://dataved.ru/ > > > +7 916 562 8095 > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:42 PM, Alexei Fedotov < > [email protected] > > > > > > wrote: > > > > Maxim, thanks for the tags! > > > > -- > > > > With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями, > > > > Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов, > > > > http://dataved.ru/ > > > > +7 916 562 8095 > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Maxim Solodovnik < > [email protected] > > > > > > wrote: > > > >> I believe ""Release early, release often" assumes we use one branch" > > > can be > > > >> followed with any number of branches :) > > > >> > > > >>>> "It is uncool when users come to support engineers" > > > >> I currently feel I'm the only support engineer :) > > > >> > > > >>>> Don't expect it become easier with html5 > > > >> I DO expect!, and things are MUCH easier with HTML5 :) > > > >> > > > >>>> How to get 2.1 code? > > > >> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openmeetings/tags/2.1RC3/ > > > >> > > > >>>> How to get 2.1.1 code? > > > >> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openmeetings/branches/2.1/ > > > >> > > > >>>> Were all these mentioned fixes ported to 3.0 (taking into account > > how > > > many > > > >> times I get no for particular fix, it would be surprising and great > to > > > get > > > >> yes)? > > > >> I'm not sure what do you mean by "all these mentioned fixes", all > > fixes > > > >> made by me are in both branches :) > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 5:06 PM, Alexei Fedotov < > > > [email protected]>wrote: > > > >> > > > >>> Just one comment. "Release early, release often" assumes we use one > > > branch, > > > >>> where we fix errors quickly. Having two branches gives us the > > expected > > > >>> result that developers care less about users when develop in their > > > >>> development branch. When something is released, developers switch > to > > a > > > new > > > >>> develioment branch and continue being cool and creative. > > > >>> > > > >>> It is uncool when users come to support engineers and they feed > them > > > with > > > >>> tweaks and workarounds. You won't imagine the quirkiness of > > workarounds > > > >>> used to demonstrate a SIP video integration. > > > >>> > > > >>> Everyone wants to fix bugs when they are easy to reproduce. Most of > > > them > > > >>> are not due to the fact that openmeetings has a lot of unreliable > > > >>> technologies at its base. > > > >>> > > > >>> Don't expect it become easier with html5. Contrary, we will get own > > > >>> problems for each browser. That's why testing infrastructure is > > > important > > > >>> before we start releasing things. > > > >>> > > > >>> Maxim, regardless of the discussions. How to get 2.1 code? How to > get > > > 2.1.1 > > > >>> code? Were all these mentioned fixes ported to 3.0 (taking into > > > account how > > > >>> many times I get no for particular fix, it would be surprising and > > > great to > > > >>> get yes)? > > > >>> 02.06.2013 15:06 пользователь "George Kirkham" < > > [email protected] > > > > > > > >>> написал: > > > >>> > > > >>> > Hi, > > > >>> > > > > >>> > My apologies, I had thought that 2.1.1 had been released. > > > >>> > > > > >>> > It would be good to release a stable version, whether that be > 2.1.1 > > > or > > > >>> > 3.0.0 I don't care too much (as I do not know the difference > > between > > > >>> > versions). > > > >>> > > > > >>> > The main point is to have; > > > >>> > a) a stable released version for production use. The version > would > > > be > > > >>> > used for production while new features are prepared and fixed in > > the > > > >>> > current development version. Fixes for any bugs that are > > discovered > > > >>> either > > > >>> > in production or in development should be made to both this > > > production > > > >>> > version and to the development version (where still applicable). > > > >>> > > > > >>> > b) a development version to which new features are added, bug > fixes > > > for > > > >>> > issues discovered in production. Full testing should be > performed > > > often, > > > >>> > and at least any time a new feature is added. > > > >>> > > > > >>> > At some point, additional features are put on hold, a full > testing > > > >>> > completed, and then the development version can be released to > > > update the > > > >>> > production version, after which the development version is > > > incremented > > > >>> and > > > >>> > the cycle continues, the development version is updated with new > > > >>> features. > > > >>> > > > > >>> > One question I would have, do we have a test procedure (document) > > > that > > > >>> > lists all features to be tested? Such a test procedure can be > used > > > to > > > >>> test > > > >>> > a version as it is prepared for production release, and after any > > > time > > > >>> that > > > >>> > bug fixes are applied to the production version. If we have > such > > a > > > >>> > document, I would suggest it is not complete, as at times I have > > seen > > > >>> > issues that are obvious and have not been removed. > > > >>> > > > > >>> > Thanks, > > > >>> > > > > >>> > George Kirkham > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > -----Original Message----- > > > >>> > From: Maxim Solodovnik [mailto:[email protected]] > > > >>> > Sent: Sunday, 2 June 2013 12:30 PM > > > >>> > To: [email protected] > > > >>> > Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] upcoming 2.1.1 release > > > >>> > > > > >>> > I would vote for 2.1.1 release because: > > > >>> > 1) 17 issues were fixed: 1 blocker, 1 critical, 9 major. > > > >>> > 2) logging was improved: there is currently trivial way to get > the > > > exact > > > >>> > OM version > > > >>> > 3) 3.0 is not ready yet > > > >>> > 4) "release early, release often" strategy > > > >>> > > > > >>> > PS your grep containing network related issues "Connection > > refused", > > > "not > > > >>> > Authenticated", "Broken pipe" is not very helpful > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 1:01 AM, Alexei Fedotov < > > > [email protected] > > > >>> > >wrote: > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > There are two possible options. > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > 1. Test heavily and ship 2.1.1 release. > > > >>> > > 2. Test heavily and ship 3.0 release instead. > > > >>> > > 3. Ship 3.0 pre-release without heavy testing. > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > Why should we bother about testing in 2.1.1? Haven't we just > > > improved > > > >>> > > a few things? We don't actually know if we have improved > things. > > > Any > > > >>> > > change have a risk of breaking something. > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > My suggestion is to have testing infrastructure implemented, > this > > > >>> > > would help in testing. This will provide feedback. I prefer > > option > > > >>> > > (2), or (3) because (1) is a waste of heavy testing effort. We > > > don't > > > >>> > > have enough resources to test two branches thoroughly. > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > I constantly get suggestions (the last one from you one > Friday), > > > like > > > >>> > > let's have a low quality development branch, where we will > > > progress, > > > >>> > > and be creative, and let's have someone to produce reliable > > > branches > > > >>> > > from these development branches. For people in a role of > support > > > >>> > > engineers it's hard. That's another reason why I prefer (2) or > > (3) > > > to > > > >>> > > (1). > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > BTW, here is start of the error log in our 2.1.1 installation. > > One > > > can > > > >>> > > start fixing existing problems, if we want a release. > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > 45 at > > > >>> > > > > > org.apache.catalina.valves.ErrorReportValve.invoke(ErrorReportValve.ja > > > >>> > > va:99) [tomcat-embed-core-jar-7.0.34.jar:7.0.34] > > > >>> > > 45 at > > > >>> > > > > > org.apache.catalina.core.StandardEngineValve.invoke(StandardEngineValv > > > >>> > > e.java:118) [tomcat-embed-core-jar-7.0.34.jar:7.0.34] > > > >>> > > 42 Caused by: java.net.SocketException: Broken pipe > > > >>> > > 42 at > > > >>> > > > > > org.apache.openjpa.jdbc.sql.SQLExceptions.getStore(SQLExceptions.java: > > > >>> > > 62) > > > >>> > > ~[openjpa-bundle-2.2.1.jar:2.2.1] > > > >>> > > 42 at > > > >>> > > > > > org.apache.openjpa.jdbc.sql.SQLExceptions.getStore(SQLExceptions.java: > > > >>> > > 136) > > > >>> > > ~[openjpa-bundle-2.2.1.jar:2.2.1] > > > >>> > > 42 at > > > >>> > > > > > org.apache.openjpa.jdbc.sql.SQLExceptions.getStore(SQLExceptions.java: > > > >>> > > 110) > > > >>> > > ~[openjpa-bundle-2.2.1.jar:2.2.1] > > > >>> > > 42 at > > > >>> > > > > > org.apache.openjpa.jdbc.sql.DBDictionary.newStoreException(DBDictionar > > > >>> > > y.java:4918) > > > >>> > > ~[openjpa-bundle-2.2.1.jar:2.2.1] > > > >>> > > 42 at > > > >>> > > > > > org.apache.openjpa.jdbc.sql.DBDictionary.narrow(DBDictionary.java:4958 > > > >>> > > ) > > > >>> > > ~[openjpa-bundle-2.2.1.jar:2.2.1] > > > >>> > > 42 at > > > >>> > > > > > org.apache.openjpa.jdbc.kernel.JDBCStoreManager.connect(JDBCStoreManag > > > >>> > > er.java:971) > > > >>> > > ~[openjpa-bundle-2.2.1.jar:2.2.1] > > > >>> > > 42 at java.net.SocketOutputStream.socketWrite0(Native > > Method) > > > >>> > > ~[na:1.6.0_27] > > > >>> > > 42 at > > > >>> > > > > > com.mysql.jdbc.SQLError.createCommunicationsException(SQLError.java:11 > > > >>> > > 17) ~[mysql-connector-java-jar-5.1.22.jar:na] > > > >>> > > 42 at com.mysql.jdbc.MysqlIO.send(MysqlIO.java:3851) > > > >>> > > ~[mysql-connector-java-jar-5.1.22.jar:na] > > > >>> > > 32 at > > > >>> > > sun.reflect.NativeConstructorAccessorImpl.newInstance0(Native > > > >>> > > Method) ~[na:1.6.0_27] > > > >>> > > 21 at > > > >>> > > > > > org.springframework.orm.jpa.JpaTransactionManager.doCommit(JpaTransact > > > >>> > > ionManager.java:516) > > > >>> > > ~[org.springframework.orm-jar-3.1.1.RELEASE.jar:3.1.1.RELEASE] > > > >>> > > 21 at > > > >>> > > > > > org.springframework.orm.jpa.EntityManagerFactoryUtils.convertJpaAccess > > > >>> > > ExceptionIfPossible(EntityManagerFactoryUtils.java:326) > > > >>> > > ~[org.springframework.orm-jar-3.1.1.RELEASE.jar:3.1.1.RELEASE] > > > >>> > > 21 at > > > >>> > > > > > org.springframework.orm.jpa.DefaultJpaDialect.translateExceptionIfPoss > > > >>> > > ible(DefaultJpaDialect.java:120) > > > >>> > > ~[org.springframework.orm-jar-3.1.1.RELEASE.jar:3.1.1.RELEASE] > > > >>> > > 19 FailedObject: select c from Sessiondata as c where > > > >>> > > c.session_id LIKE :session_id [java.lang.String] > > > >>> > > 16 java.lang.NullPointerException: null > > > >>> > > 12 at > > > >>> > > > > > org.apache.openmeetings.remote.ConferenceService.getRoomsByOrganisatio > > > >>> > > nWithoutType(ConferenceService.java:147) > > > >>> > > ~[openmeetings-2.1.1-SNAPSHOT.jar:na] > > > >>> > > 10 at > > > >>> > > sun.reflect.GeneratedConstructorAccessor283.newInstance(Unknown > > > >>> > > Source) ~[na:na] > > > >>> > > 4 at > > > >>> > > > > > org.apache.openmeetings.remote.red5.ScopeApplicationAdapter.roomLeaveB > > > >>> > > yScope(ScopeApplicationAdapter.java:564) > > > >>> > > [openmeetings-2.1.1-SNAPSHOT.jar:na] > > > >>> > > 2 java.lang.Exception: not Authenticated > > > >>> > > 2 ERROR 05-28 20:44:56.425 o.a.o.r.WhiteBoardService:408 > > > >>> > > [NioProcessor-6] - WhiteboardSyncLockObject not found for this > > > Client > > > >>> > > {} > > > >>> > > 2 ERROR 05-28 20:44:56.423 o.a.o.r.WhiteBoardService:408 > > > >>> > > [NioProcessor-6] - WhiteboardSyncLockObject not found for this > > > Client > > > >>> > > {} > > > >>> > > 2 Caused by: > > > >>> > > com.mysql.jdbc.exceptions.jdbc4.CommunicationsException: The > last > > > >>> > > packet successfully received from the server was 84 612 291 > > > >>> > > milliseconds ago. The last packet sent successfully to the > > server > > > was > > > >>> > > 84 612 291 milliseconds ago. is longer than the server > configured > > > >>> > > value of 'wait_timeout'. You should consider either expiring > > and/or > > > >>> > > testing connection validity before use in your application, > > > increasing > > > >>> > > the server configured values for client timeouts, or using the > > > >>> > > Connector/J connection property 'autoReconnect=true' to avoid > > this > > > >>> > > problem. > > > >>> > > 2 at > > > >>> > > > > > org.apache.openmeetings.axis.services.FileWebService.getFileExplorerBy > > > >>> > > RoomSelf(FileWebService.java:728) > > > >>> > > ~[openmeetings-WebService-2.1.1-SNAPSHOT.jar:na] > > > >>> > > 1 org.springframework.orm.jpa.JpaSystemException: The > last > > > >>> > > packet successfully received from the server was 84 612 291 > > > >>> > > milliseconds ago. The last packet sent successfully to the > > server > > > was > > > >>> > > 84 612 291 milliseconds ago. is longer than the server > configured > > > >>> > > value of 'wait_timeout'. You should consider either expiring > > and/or > > > >>> > > testing connection validity before use in your application, > > > increasing > > > >>> > > the server configured values for client timeouts, or using the > > > >>> > > Connector/J connection property 'autoReconnect=true' to avoid > > this > > > >>> > > problem.; nested exception is <openjpa-2.2.1-r422266:1396819 > > fatal > > > >>> > > general error> > > org.apache.openjpa.persistence.PersistenceException: > > > >>> > > The last packet successfully received from the server was 84 > 612 > > > 291 > > > >>> > > milliseconds ago. The last packet sent successfully to the > > server > > > was > > > >>> > > 84 612 291 milliseconds ago. is longer than the server > configured > > > >>> > > value of 'wait_timeout'. You should consider either expiring > > and/or > > > >>> > > testing connection validity before use in your application, > > > increasing > > > >>> > > the server configured values for client timeouts, or using the > > > >>> > > Connector/J connection property 'autoReconnect=true' to avoid > > this > > > >>> > > problem. > > > >>> > > 1 org.apache.openjpa.persistence.PersistenceException: > The > > > last > > > >>> > > packet successfully received from the server was 39 315 457 > > > >>> > > milliseconds ago. The last packet sent successfully to the > > server > > > was > > > >>> > > 39 315 457 milliseconds ago. is longer than the server > configured > > > >>> > > value of 'wait_timeout'. You should consider either expiring > > and/or > > > >>> > > testing connection validity before use in your application, > > > increasing > > > >>> > > the server configured values for client timeouts, or using the > > > >>> > > Connector/J connection property 'autoReconnect=true' to avoid > > this > > > >>> > > problem. > > > >>> > > 1 java.net.ConnectException: Connection refused > > > >>> > > 1 INFO 05-29 14:53:34.184 o.a.o.d.u.d.UsersDao:163 > > > >>> > > [NioProcessor-4] - [getUser] Info: No USER_ID given > > > >>> > > 1 INFO 05-28 15:46:15.535 o.a.o.d.u.d.UsersDao:163 > > > >>> > > [NioProcessor-14] - [getUser] Info: No USER_ID given > > > >>> > > 1 FailedObject: select c from User as c where c.user_id = > > > >>> > > :user_id AND c.deleted <> true [java.lang.String] > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > -- > > > >>> > WBR > > > >>> > Maxim aka solomax > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> -- > > > >> WBR > > > >> Maxim aka solomax > > > > > > > > > -- > Sebastian Wagner > https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock > http://www.webbase-design.de > http://www.wagner-sebastian.com > [email protected] <[email protected]> > -- WBR Maxim aka solomax
