I just made some adjustments to source NOTICE files in tp31. The change came as a result of the bump in groovy version - they had new NOTICE files themselves after releasing under Apache. Ideally, I think it's best if we can try to catch these things earlier (like when the version bump occurred). I remember seeing that change happen, but I didn't think of checking LICENSE/NOTICE when it happened :|
anyway, please give a look to my docs on the issue of dependencies: http://tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/3.1.1-SNAPSHOT/dev/developer/#dependencies and try to keep that stuff in mind. I also think that all version bumps should go under code review as it will be a reminder to check LICENSE/NOTICE issues - i can't remember if we reviewed the groovy version bump or not, but i think "not" offhand. On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 6:34 AM, Stephen Mallette <spmalle...@gmail.com> wrote: > This was a very helpful bit of work for windows users - thanks for that. > I don't think we will merge it for the 3.1.1-incubating release as we've > frozen that release at this point and we still have discussion to deal with > about appveyor, but it will eventually be merged to the tp31 branch for > 3.1.2-incubating. It would be helpful if you could recast your PR against > that branch now that it is available. > > On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 4:32 PM, Marvin Froeder <velo...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I conduct some work to get build less unstable on windows (is not done >> yet, >> but 2 broken modules now build) >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-tinkerpop/pull/207 >> >> Would you guys like to include it on tp31? >> >> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 2:18 AM, Stephen Mallette <spmalle...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > Just pushed the tp31 branch: >> > >> > >> > >> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-tinkerpop.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/tp31 >> > >> > not sure why it hasn't mirrored to github yet, but it's there. >> Henceforth, >> > we will do 3.1.x development on tp31 and master will be for 3.2.x. We >> will >> > merge from tp31 to master as needed. Please keep in mind that we >> remain in >> > code freeze this week for 3.1.1-incubating release, therefore the tp31 >> > branch should remain frozen. In master, I've bumped the version to >> > 3.2.0-SNAPSHOT and I've deployed to the snapshot repo. >> > >> > >> > >> > On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 7:09 AM, Stephen Mallette <spmalle...@gmail.com >> > >> > wrote: >> > >> > > 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? >> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>> >> > >> >>>>>>>> >> > >> >>>>>>>> >> > >> >>>>>>> >> > >> >>>>>> >> > >> >>>>> >> > >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > > >> > >> > >
