I don't think we should hold the branch up anymore. I'm good to fire that up on Monday.
On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 9:24 PM, Marko Rodriguez <okramma...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hey Stephen, > > Will you be making a tp31 branch? If so, when. I plan to start knockin' it > out on 3.2.0 on Monday. > > Thanks a lot, > Marko. > > http://markorodriguez.com > > On Jan 29, 2016, at 6:04 PM, Stephen Mallette <spmalle...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi all, I just deployed what I hope was the final 3.1.1-SNAPSHOT prior to > > throwing up a version for VOTE. We'd decided on taking another week with > > code freeze, though as of right now I'm not so sure we need the full > week. > > Things sorta came together today nicely with final tests and changes so > I'm > > feeling more confident. Anyway, please try things out next week with the > > SNAPSHOT and see how things work. > > > > On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 8:48 PM, Jason Plurad <plur...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> +1 to add another week of code freeze > >> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 8:24 PM Marko Rodriguez <okramma...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Stephen, > >>> > >>> Yes --- this week Daniel and I did benchmark testing of > >> SparkGraphComputer > >>> on a cluster over Friendster (2.5 billion edges). There were so many > >> little > >>> "knick nack" things we discovered. Not so much bugs, but optimizations > >> that > >>> are crucial at large scale. With that said, I think another week of a > >> "code > >>> freeze" would be good. I'd like to wrap up our benchmark tomorrow and > >>> present to everyone our findings. Some of the things were learned were > >> huge > >>> and so beneficial. > >>> > >>> If everyone else is cool with another week of code freeze that is > great. > >>> If not, I will be done with our benchmark work tomorrow and all closed > up > >>> on the code by COB tomorrow. Thus, all good for a release Monday. Up to > >>> everyone else. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Marko. > >>> > >>> http://markorodriguez.com > >>> > >>> On Jan 28, 2016, at 6:10 PM, Stephen Mallette <spmalle...@gmail.com> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Code freeze kinda didn't work so well this week, in the sense that we > >>> found > >>>> some bugs and other odds and ends during testing and we had to push > >> some > >>>> commits through. Of course, that's part of what this code freeze is > >> for > >>> - > >>>> we take a moment to do some more detailed testing on a release before > >> we > >>>> pull the trigger. > >>>> > >>>> So that said, I'm wondering if we shouldn't take another "code freeze" > >>> for > >>>> another week just to be sure everything is stable and good to go. > >>>> Thoughts? > >>>> > >>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 9:09 AM, Stephen Mallette < > >> spmalle...@gmail.com> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Just a reminder that we're officially freezing the repo starting > >> today. > >>>>> Just documentation changes are allowed at this point. Please review > >>> upgrade > >>>>> documentation/changelog and update as needed. Also, please find some > >>> time > >>>>> to test and yell if you run into problems. We'll prepare for release > >>> VOTE > >>>>> next Monday. There are still some open issues hanging out there in > >> JIRA. > >>>>> If your name is attached to those can you please update those so that > >> we > >>>>> can either close them or move them off to another version. Thanks! > >>>>> > >>>>> On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 11:50 AM, Stephen Mallette < > >>> spmalle...@gmail.com> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Can committers please do some reviews and throw in some votes so > that > >>> we > >>>>>> can get these final PRs merged in? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-tinkerpop/pull/205 > >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-tinkerpop/pull/201 > >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-tinkerpop/pull/170 (marko - you > >>> said > >>>>>> you were working with kuppitz on this one some time back) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I guess we don't need to worry about these two for right now: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-tinkerpop/pull/186 > >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-tinkerpop/pull/195 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> thanks, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Stephen > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 6:22 AM, Stephen Mallette < > >>> spmalle...@gmail.com> > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> I cleaned up the issue list based on feedback. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Jason, any update on this one: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-964 > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> can we close? or do we need to move forward to next version? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 7:23 PM, Marko Rodriguez < > >>> okramma...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Yea. Kuppitz and I are testing SparkGraphComputer on a cluster > >> (both > >>>>>>>> SparkServer and Hadoop2). We are having problems with > >>>>>>>> ClassNotFound/jar-style exceptions. Not really ticket worthy as > its > >>> not > >>>>>>>> "code" as much as us just learning about the patterns people > should > >>> use for > >>>>>>>> deploying jars. We will have this all settled and tested at scale > >>> (Enron > >>>>>>>> dataset) by the end of the week. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>>> Marko. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> http://markorodriguez.com > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Jan 19, 2016, at 5:04 PM, Daniel Kuppitz <m...@gremlin.guru> > >> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Forgot to mention: Marko and I are still trying to fix some > >>>>>>>>> SparkGraphComputer issues (I don't think there're open tickets > for > >>> the > >>>>>>>>> stuff we're doing). > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Cheers, > >>>>>>>>> Daniel > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 1:02 AM, Daniel Kuppitz <m...@gremlin.guru > > > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> I don't think I get the script things done (TINKERPOP-927 > >>>>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-927> and > >>>>>>>> TINKERPOP-986 > >>>>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-986>). I'm > >>> waiting > >>>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>>>> feedback from Michael for TINKERPOP-939 > >>>>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-939> (not much > >>>>>>>>>> confidence here either). > >>>>>>>>>> TINKERPOP-943 < > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-943 > >>>> > >>>>>>>> has > >>>>>>>>>> an open PR (simple stuff, will def. make it into 3.1.1). > >>>>>>>>>> TINKERPOP-818 < > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-818 > >>>> > >>>>>>>>>> should be easy, chances are high that you'll see a PR in the > >> coming > >>>>>>>> days. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Cheers, > >>>>>>>>>> Daniel > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 9:31 PM, Stephen Mallette < > >>>>>>>> spmalle...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> We have the rest of this week to hack away until code freeze > >>>>>>>> arrives next > >>>>>>>>>>> Monday, January 25th 2016. As it stands we have a handful of > >>> items > >>>>>>>>>>> remaining - some are already in pull requests awaiting review. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Anyone foresee any troubles getting their bits done in time for > >>> code > >>>>>>>>>>> freeze? > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> We also have these open issues which are unassigned to anyone: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> + Develop a less error prone way for rewriting strategies - > >>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-882 - don't > >>>>>>>> imagine we > >>>>>>>>>>> will > >>>>>>>>>>> make this happen. > >>>>>>>>>>> + Graph Configuration Class - > >>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-659 > >>>>>>>>>>> + StructureStandardTestSuite has file I/O issues on Windows > >>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1041 - Jason, > >>>>>>>> sorry to > >>>>>>>>>>> make > >>>>>>>>>>> you "Windows guy" on this one, but is this one you can easily > >>> solve? > >>>>>>>>>>> + Validate dependency grabs that have TinkerPop dependencies - > >>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-893 - this was > >>>>>>>>>>> low-hanging > >>>>>>>>>>> fruit that we thought someone in the community might pick up - > >> we > >>>>>>>> can > >>>>>>>>>>> probably push that off to another version. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Comments? > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >
