great news! :-) if you're running ok the "tests" target, then I'm +1 for ditching the guitests target.
br, juan pablo On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Siegfried Goeschl <sgoes...@gmx.at> wrote: > Hi folks, > > after a few discussion with folks from JSPWiki it seems that the problem > stems from the guitest runner invocation > > * the "guitests" issue shall be fixed after the graduation vote > * I created JSPWIKI-751 to keep track of that > > So I re-cast my vote > > [X ] +1 Approve the release > > [] -1 Disapprove the release (please provide specific comments) > > Cheers, > > Siegfried > > > On 10.11.12 00:20, Siegfried Goeschl wrote: > >> Hi Craig, >> >> worx for me ... ;-) >> >> Cheers, >> >> Siegfried Goeschl >> >> On 09.11.12 23:15, Craig L Russell wrote: >> >>> Hi Siegfried, >>> >>> Thanks for taking a look at the release. You have given a good reason >>> for your -1. Reasonable people may disagree; I would not call this issue a >>> blocker. In fact, there's no requirement that a release actually work (!) >>> but that it is legally proper and downstream users might find it useful. >>> That's why a -1 will not block a release, assuming more +1 than -1. >>> >>> We have several +1 and your -1 so far. If we don't get any more votes, >>> we will forward the vote to the IPMC for their approval. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Craig >>> >>> >>> On Nov 9, 2012, at 2:09 PM, Siegfried Goeschl wrote: >>> >>> Hi Florian and Harry, >>>> >>>> thanks for responding even in the middle of the night ... >>>> >>>> ad 1) my bad - I indeed used an old wiki page set - shame on me >>>> >>>> ad 2) "The guitests target is not part of the build sequence for good >>>> reasons" - I know but how you find any new GUI bugs if the guitests are >>>> considered broken and not executed? Maybe the next time we get 18 errors >>>> instead of 17 but when the tests are ignored that one bug could cause >>>> frustration within the JSPWiki user community when it escapes into the real >>>> world - I had my five minutes of fame when a late change caused a NPE in my >>>> commons-exec release - I think I got more than 20 mails with "btw, there is >>>> a stupid NPE in this method". IMHO it is acceptable to state that 17 tests >>>> are indeed broken but those 17 tests should be commented out to get overall >>>> guitests working - for the remaining 17 tests we can create a JIRA and hope >>>> for better times. >>>> >>>> ad 3) I completely agree with your disagreement and I dislike the RAT >>>> report as well ... :-) ... but two thoughts on that : on the one hand there >>>> are already exceptions defined in the RAT report generation on the other >>>> hand some guys are pretty stubborn regarding RAT report violation - they >>>> have somehow the tendency to skip interpreting the RAT report and complain >>>> about it which could cause a RC to fail. I had too many rejected RC with >>>> Apache Commons ... >>>> >>>> Conclusion - 1) was my mistake, I have a major issue with 2) and minor >>>> issue with 3) >>>> >>>> Still on -1 >>>> >>>> Hope you understand me reasoning >>>> >>>> Siegfried Goeschl >>>> >>>> On 09.11.12 21:54, Florian Holeczek wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Siegfried, >>>>> >>>>> first, thanks for having had a thorough look at the stuff! >>>>> >>>>> 1) [Major] when I deploy the exploded WAR to my local Tomcat the >>>>>> "Find Pages" in the left hand navigation does not work - it shows an >>>>>> non-existing Wiki page instead of opening a search page - I tried with >>>>>> the >>>>>> LuceneSearchProvider and the BasicSearchProvider but it does not work. I >>>>>> did not see any error message in jspwiki.log but the fulltext search DOES >>>>>> work when using the "Quick Navigation" >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> you're probably using an old wiki page set, so this is expected >>>>> behaviour. Please see https://issues.apache.org/** >>>>> jira/browse/JSPWIKI-664<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JSPWIKI-664> >>>>> >>>>> 2) [Major] when running "ant guitests" 17 out of my 962 test fail. >>>>>> Could be some missing configuration I'm not aware of but I would expect >>>>>> all >>>>>> tests to pass ... ;-) >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The guitests target is not part of the build sequence for good reasons >>>>> :-) >>>>> >>>>> 3) [Minor] The RAT report could appreciate a few more exceptions to >>>>>> get rid of the "17 Unknown Licenses" >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I completely disagree in this point - The RAT report is nothing one >>>>> will want to tell "Great, all fine!", in order to print it out and >>>>> decorate >>>>> some wall. Instead, it's only a helper tool that is meant to generate a >>>>> good, unfiltered overview of reality. It's then up to the reader to >>>>> interpret its contents. >>>>> Putting exceptions into it means that you lose control over the >>>>> ignored files and risk to oversee relevant issues in later modifications >>>>> of >>>>> these files. >>>>> >>>>> Can anyone double-check? Currently (see 1+2) my vote is >>>>>> >>>>>> [ ] +1 Approve the release >>>>>> [X] -1 Disapprove the release (please provide specific comments) >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The only issue IMO is no. 2 - but it's a minor issue that should not >>>>> be blocking a release. WDYT? >>>>> >>>>> Regards >>>>> Florian >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> Craig L Russell >>> Architect, Oracle >>> http://db.apache.org/jdo >>> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.**com<craig.russ...@oracle.com> >>> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! >>> >>> >> >
