So, 3.4.0-rc2 for Gremlin.Net is published. The template attempted to
publish but failed with:
[exec] Pushing Gremlin.Net.Template.3.4.0-rc2.nupkg to '
https://www.nuget.org/api/v2/package'...
[exec] PUT https://www.nuget.org/api/v2/package/
[exec] ServiceUnavailable https://www.nuget.org/api/v2/package/ 458ms
[exec] PUT https://www.nuget.org/api/v2/package/
[exec] 403 (The specified API key is invalid, has expired, or does not
have permission to access the specified package.)
[exec] Forbidden https://www.nuget.org/api/v2/package/ 702ms
I'm not sure what's going on there....does that make any sense to you,
Florian?
On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 9:26 AM Florian Hockmann <[email protected]>
wrote:
> It should at least. We have never tested it, but the docs say that 'mvn
> clean install -Dnuget' can be used to create the package. So, the other
> Maven commands should work the same way. If it doesn't directly work or
> if you run into any other problems, then I can also give it a try.
>
>
> Am 27.09.2018 um 15:20 schrieb Stephen Mallette:
> > uh....i don't remember if there is anything special i need to do to make
> > that happen. does it just deploy with the standard deploy instructions?
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 9:13 AM Florian Hockmann <[email protected]
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Great, do you also plan to include the Gremlin.Net.Template in this
> >> prerelease?
> >>
> >>
> >> Am 26.09.2018 um 13:00 schrieb Stephen Mallette:
> >>> Just a quick note that I plan to do the .NET 3.4.0-rc2 release
> tomorrow.
> >>>
> >>> Here's the updated todo list for the 3.2.10/3.3.4:
> >>>
> >>> + TINKERPOP-2025 - https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/pull/935 ready
> to
> >>> merge
> >>> + TINKERPOP-2019/TINKERPOP-2043 - Possible bugs in .NET
> >>> + TINKERPOP-1906 - Make status messages/attributes from the server more
> >>> available in .NET (maybe already done on TINKERPOP-1913 to some degree)
> >>> + TINKERPOP-1972 - Two failing tests in .NET (I can't seem to get to
> the
> >>> bottom of this one)
> >>> + https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/pull/920 - minor refactoring,
> just
> >>> had some activity on it, so it looks like this one will get in:
> >>> + https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/pull/922 - gremlin-js script
> >>> submission (critical imo - i would hold release over this)
> >>> + https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/pull/928 - this one just needs
> to
> >> be
> >>> merged i think - it's past cooling down period (florian has been on
> >> holiday)
> >>> + https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/pull/929 - this one is all set
> >> afaik
> >>> and just needs to be merged to tp32 (jorge is handling that one)
> >>> + https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/pull/939 - groovy dependency
> >> cleanup
> >>> - easy one
> >>>
> >>> Note that I removed PR 903 as it's slated for 3.4.0 at this point.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 9:46 PM Stephen Mallette <[email protected]
> >
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> we need to add TINKERPOP-2025 to this too:
> >>>>
> >>>> +TINKERPOP-2025 - which is related to the build - Kuppitz, i think you
> >> had
> >>>> said that you were looking at that one....don't think we can release
> >>>> without that
> >>>> + Open PRs <= 903 (maybe with the exception of 920) - of critical note
> >> to
> >>>> me is 922 - that's on the critical path to me
> >>>> + TINKERPOP-2019/TINKERPOP-2043 - Possible bugs in .NET
> >>>> + TINKERPOP-1906 - Make status messages/attributes from the server
> more
> >>>> available in .NET (maybe already done on TINKERPOP-1913 to some
> degree)
> >>>> + TINKERPOP-1972 - Two failing tests in .NET (I can't seem to get to
> the
> >>>> bottom of this one)
> >>>>
> >>>> I just closed out this:
> >>>>
> >>>> + TINKERPOP-2030 - Bug in Java driver around keep-alive
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 7:47 AM Stephen Mallette <
> [email protected]>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> So, it seems like we're good to push off 3.4.0 for a bit. Let's look
> to
> >>>>> do the 3.4.0-rc2 for .NET next week - any volunteers to handle that?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> As for 3.2.10 and 3.3.4 code freeze, perhaps we look to do that in
> two
> >>>>> weeks October 5 which would give us a release around the week of
> >> October
> >>>>> 15. If that's agreeable then please raise any issue that are thought
> >> to be
> >>>>> important for release so that we can track them here. Here's a few of
> >>>>> concern:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> + Open PRs <= 903 (maybe with the exception of 920) - of critical
> note
> >> to
> >>>>> me is 922 - that's on the critical path to me
> >>>>> + TINKERPOP-2030 - Bug in Java driver around keep-alive
> >>>>> + TINKERPOP-2019/TINKERPOP-2043 - Possible bugs in .NET
> >>>>> + TINKERPOP-1906 - Make status messages/attributes from the server
> more
> >>>>> available in .NET (maybe already done on TINKERPOP-1913 to some
> degree)
> >>>>> + TINKERPOP-1972 - Two failing tests in .NET (I can't seem to get to
> >> the
> >>>>> bottom of this one)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 12:33 PM Stephen Mallette <
> >> [email protected]>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Given the importance of TINKERPOP-1913 for the CosmosDB community, I
> >>>>>> think we should consider pushing out a 3.4.0-rc2 for .NET.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 11:10 AM Robert Dale <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Robert Dale
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 4:13 AM Jorge Bay Gondra <
> >>>>>>> [email protected]>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I agree we should start looking at timelines for 3.2.10 and 3.3.4
> >> and
> >>>>>>> don't
> >>>>>>>> bother yet with a 3.4 release.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> El mar., 18 sept. 2018 a las 1:51, Stephen Mallette (<
> >>>>>>> [email protected]
> >>>>>>>>> )
> >>>>>>>> escribió:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I've been floating around "end of summer" for a release time
> frame
> >>>>>>> for
> >>>>>>>> some
> >>>>>>>>> time now. Well, end of summer is basically here and I feel like
> >>>>>>> 3.4.0
> >>>>>>>> still
> >>>>>>>>> needs work. I feel like we should give it a bit more time to
> >>>>>>> develop and
> >>>>>>>>> then give it some fresh consideration in the next couple of
> months.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> That said, 3.2.10 and 3.3.4 have a lot of good bug fixes and
> minor
> >>>>>>>>> features. Perhaps those shouldn't be delayed any further. Maybe
> we
> >>>>>>> could
> >>>>>>>>> look to code freeze in next few weeks on those branches and
> >>>>>>> release. Then
> >>>>>>>>> we could do a smaller 3.2.11 and 3.3.5 when 3.4.0 feels more
> ready.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Anyway any concerns about heading down that direction?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>
>
>
