A few more bugs got cleaned up during code freeze this week, but from my perspective i'm comfortable with going forward with a a VOTE on 3.1.1-incubating artifacts for Monday. Please yell if there are any concerns.
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 12:12 PM, Jason Plurad <plur...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1. The Groovy version bump came on the same PR > < > https://github.com/apache/incubator-tinkerpop/commit/78b10569755070b088c460341bb473112dfe3ffe#diff-402e09222db9327564f28924e1b39d0c > > > as the Spark version bump. I ran into this a few days ago because of some > Spark > incompatibilities <https://pony-poc.apache.org/thread.html/Zk7jcpz0d1pa1kj > >, > which turned out to be a deeper issue with serialized RDDs in Spark. > > Both were minor updates, so in theory it shouldn't have caused any > problems, but more due diligence for dependencies would be best -- > especially for Guava, Netty, Jackson, and other widely used ones. > > On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 7:49 AM, Stephen Mallette <spmalle...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > 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? > > >> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > > >> > >> >>>>>>>>>> > > >> > >> >>>>>>>>>> > > >> > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> > >> >>>>>>> > > >> > >> >>>>>> > > >> > >> >>>>> > > >> > >> >>> > > >> > >> >>> > > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
