I got an email that states: The package Gremlin.Net 3.4.0-rc2 <https://www.nuget.org/packages/Gremlin.Net/3.4.0-rc2> was recently published on NuGet Gallery by tinkerpop. If this was not intended, please contact support <https://www.nuget.org/packages/Gremlin.Net/3.4.0-rc2/ReportMyPackage>. The link works. Looks like it worked.
Robert Dale On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 10:21 AM Stephen Mallette <[email protected]> wrote: > 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? > > >>>>>>>>> > > >> > > > > >
