Tested the portal and it works again. Thanks for fixing it.
On 6 April 2012 20:37, Mahadevan, Venkat <[email protected]> wrote: > Fixed the issue. Please let me know otherwise. > > > Venkat > > > On 4/6/12 9:19 AM, "Mahadevan, Venkat" <[email protected]> wrote: > > >Jasha, I will work on RAVE-541 and fix the issue > > > > > > > >On 4/6/12 6:26 AM, "Jasha Joachimsthal" <[email protected]> > >wrote: > > > >>On 6 April 2012 10:46, Ate Douma <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >>> On 04/06/2012 10:41 AM, Ate Douma wrote: > >>> > >>>> I've got two remarks so far: > >>>> > >>>> a) This release candidate is dependent on the non-yet released > >>>> rave-master-0.10, > >>>> which I don't like much. > >>>> > >>>> IMO it would have been better to wait another day until the > >>>>rave-master > >>>> was > >>>> formally released. Although the rave-master release most certainly > >>>>will > >>>> commence, in theory if we find a last minute blocker issue with it > >>>> causing its > >>>> release to be failed, it would cause *this* release candidate then to > >>>>fail > >>>> automatically as well... > >>>> > >>>> b) Issue RAVE-553 just reported by Jasha and also confirmed by myself > >>>> makes the > >>>> release useless for all practical use-cases and most certainly should > >>>> have been > >>>> easily tested/found before the release. We should look into improving > >>>>our > >>>> quality assurance and add some minimal but sensible (interaction) > >>>>testing > >>>> plan > >>>> which should pass before we cut a release candidate because this is > >>>>quite > >>>> annoying. > >>>> > >>>> For b) I'm inclined to vote -1 or at least -0. As I haven't had time > >>>>to > >>>> further > >>>> review I'll postpone casting my vote for now but it doesn't look rosy > >>>>to > >>>> me. > >>>> > >>> > >>> BTW: just want to make clear, especially for Raminder, I consider b) > >>>and > >>> the need for improving on our quality assurance a responsibility of the > >>> team, including myself, not one of the release-manager who but must > >>>execute > >>> and ascertain this. > >> > >> > >>If I revert the commit in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RAVE-541 > >>I > >>can create new users again. I don't know what the intention of this > >>feature > >>was, but the result is that it creates a new PROFILE page instead of a > >>new > >>USER page. The portal cannot handle a user without a user page. The > >>portal > >>can however render a profile page if no profile page is present yet for > >>that user. > >> > >>We have multiple options: > >>0. accept the 0.10 release, but I also doubt between -0 and -1 > >>1. reject the 0.10 release, fix or revert the issue, no new release until > >>the end of the month > >>2. reject the 0.10 release, revert the commit done for RAVE-541 and > >>create > >>a new 0.10.1 release after the rave-master pom has been released > >>3. reject the 0.10 release, fix the RAVE-541 issue and create a new > >>0.10.1 > >>release after the rave-master pom has been released > >> > >>For option 2 & 3 we don't want other new features in the 0.10.1 release > >>so > >>either > >>a. hold all commits until the issue RAVE-541 has been resolved or > >>reverted. > >>Create a release from trunk (0.11-SNAPSHOT -> 0.10.1 -> 0.11-SNAPSHOT) > >>b. create a branch from 0.10 tag (0.10.1-SNAPSHOT), fix or revert > >>RAVE-541, > >>release from the branch (0.10.1-SNAPSHOT -> 0.10.1 -> 0.10.2-SNAPSHOT). > >>Merge the fix into trunk (0.11-SNAPSHOT) > >> > >>@Venkat (or whoever can fix the issue and knows what the intention was): > >>in > >>case we want a 0.10.1 release, do you think you can fix this issue soon, > >>shall we first revert your commit and give you more time to solve it? > >> > >>Jasha > >> > >> > >> > >>> > >>> > >>>> Ate > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 04/06/2012 02:51 AM, Raminderjeet Singh wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> This is discussion thread for vote on Apache Rave Project 0.10 > >>>>>Release > >>>>> Candidate > >>>>> > >>>>> For more information on the release process, checkout - > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>http://rave.apache.org/**release-management.html< > http://rave.apache.or > >>>>>g > >>>>>/release-management.html> > >>>>> > >>>>> Some of the things to check before voting are: > >>>>> - can you run the demo binaries > >>>>> - can you build the contents of source-release.zip and svn tag > >>>>> - do all of the staged jars/zips contain the required LICENSE, NOTICE > >>>>>and > >>>>> DISCLAIMER files > >>>>> - are all of the staged jars signed and the signature verifiable > >>>>> - is the signing key in the project's KEYS file and on a public > >>>>>server > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > > > > > >
