Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Steve Rowe]

I updated the ReleaseToDo wiki page to specify running addVersion.py and 
addBackCompatIndexes.py on the release branch, regardless of release type.

--
Steve
www.lucidworks.com

> On Apr 10, 2017, at 12:23 PM, jim ferenczi  wrote:
> 
> > It’s not true that “we cannot test the backcompatibility of the 6.5.0 
> > branch with itself”.  After releasing a *.0 releae, the RM can just set the 
> > release branch version to *.1, and then there are no issues with adding the 
> > *.0 backcompat indexes.
> 
> Yes if we add the next bugfix version in the release branch *after* the 
> release. I spent some time last night trying to understand what happened so 
> definitely +1 to make the process more consistent.  
> 
> 2017-04-10 17:21 GMT+02:00 Steve Rowe :
> It’s not true that “we cannot test the backcompatibility of the 6.5.0 branch 
> with itself”.  After releasing a *.0 releae, the RM can just set the release 
> branch version to *.1, and then there are no issues with adding the *.0 
> backcompat indexes.
> 
> I believe the real reason these don’t get added to the release branches is 
> economy of effort.  It’s not certain that there will be a *.1 release after a 
> *.0 release, so why bother?
> 
> This is a constant source of confusion, though.  Effort is definitely not 
> economized when considering an RM who’s never done a bugfix release before.
> 
> Some perspective: 8/12 of the 5.X and 6.X relase branches had, or will have 
> (6.5.1), at least one bugfix release.  It’s now the *ordinary* case that 
> release branches will get a bugfix release.
> 
> I think it’s time to change the ReleaseToDo to tell RMs to always generate 
> the backcompat indexes on the release branch, regardless of whether the 
> current release is a bugfix release.
> 
> --
> Steve
> www.lucidworks.com
> 
> > On Apr 9, 2017, at 6:05 PM, jim ferenczi  wrote:
> >
> > Ok sorry I should have been more specific. The backcompat tests are not 
> > created on the release branch for the first minor release (eg. 6.5.0). They 
> > are only created for the master branch and the 6x branch. Then during the 
> > first bugfix of the current release branch (eg. 6.5.1) we push the 
> > backcompat test directly on the release branch. This is not done before 
> > because we cannot test the backcompatibitily of the 6.5.0 branch with 
> > itself.
> >
> > 2017-04-09 22:57 GMT+02:00 Joel Bernstein :
> > Thanks Jim, I don't quite understand the rational for when the backcompat 
> > indexes are created, but that's OK. I'll create a new RC this evening.
> >
> > Joel Bernstein
> > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 4:44 PM, jim ferenczi  wrote:
> > Joel,
> > The backcompat indexes are not added for a minor release. They are added on 
> > the first bugfix release on the minor branch. There is a note in the TODO:
> > "Make sure that the backcompat index for the previous release has been 
> > added to the release branch. (Note that this will ordinarily not have been 
> > done if the current release is X.Y.1, i.e. the first bugfix release off the 
> > stable branch.) See the post-release section "Generate Backcompat Indexes" 
> > below - remember you'll be generating an index for the previous release."
> >
> > I just pushed the backcompat indices in the release branch. You'll need to 
> > generate a new release candidate though.
> >
> > 2017-04-09 3:15 GMT+02:00 Ishan Chattopadhyaya :
> > No, this has not changed. I think backcompat indexes for the previous 
> > release was not added. The 6.5.0 's RM might've missed this step.
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 4:45 AM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
> > Looks like I need to add the back compat indexes. In  the releaseTodo this 
> > is post release activity but it looks that has changed.
> >
> > Joel Bernstein
> > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 6:58 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
> > I don't believe I've missed any steps listed:
> > https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ReleaseTodo
> >
> > Joel Bernstein
> > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 6:56 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
> > Ok, the keys appear to be sorted out now. Smoke test now gets much further 
> > but fails with the error below. I'll go back see if I've missed a step...
> > Releases that don't seem to be tested:
> >
> >   6.5.0
> >
> > Traceback (most recent call last):
> >
> >   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1476, in 
> >
> > main()
> >
> >   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1420, in main
> >
> > smokeTest(c.java, c.url, c.revision, c.version, c.tmp_dir, c.is_signed, 
> > ' '.join(c.test_args))
> >
> >   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1458, in smokeTest
> >
> > unpackAndVerify(java, 'lucene', tmpDir, 'lucene-%s-src.tgz' % version, 
> 

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[jim ferenczi]

> It’s not true that “we cannot test the backcompatibility of the 6.5.0
branch with itself”.  After releasing a *.0 releae, the RM can just set the
release branch version to *.1, and then there are no issues with adding the
*.0 backcompat indexes.

Yes if we add the next bugfix version in the release branch *after* the
release. I spent some time last night trying to understand what happened so
definitely +1 to make the process more consistent.

2017-04-10 17:21 GMT+02:00 Steve Rowe :

> It’s not true that “we cannot test the backcompatibility of the 6.5.0
> branch with itself”.  After releasing a *.0 releae, the RM can just set the
> release branch version to *.1, and then there are no issues with adding the
> *.0 backcompat indexes.
>
> I believe the real reason these don’t get added to the release branches is
> economy of effort.  It’s not certain that there will be a *.1 release after
> a *.0 release, so why bother?
>
> This is a constant source of confusion, though.  Effort is definitely not
> economized when considering an RM who’s never done a bugfix release before.
>
> Some perspective: 8/12 of the 5.X and 6.X relase branches had, or will
> have (6.5.1), at least one bugfix release.  It’s now the *ordinary* case
> that release branches will get a bugfix release.
>
> I think it’s time to change the ReleaseToDo to tell RMs to always generate
> the backcompat indexes on the release branch, regardless of whether the
> current release is a bugfix release.
>
> --
> Steve
> www.lucidworks.com
>
> > On Apr 9, 2017, at 6:05 PM, jim ferenczi  wrote:
> >
> > Ok sorry I should have been more specific. The backcompat tests are not
> created on the release branch for the first minor release (eg. 6.5.0). They
> are only created for the master branch and the 6x branch. Then during the
> first bugfix of the current release branch (eg. 6.5.1) we push the
> backcompat test directly on the release branch. This is not done before
> because we cannot test the backcompatibitily of the 6.5.0 branch with
> itself.
> >
> > 2017-04-09 22:57 GMT+02:00 Joel Bernstein :
> > Thanks Jim, I don't quite understand the rational for when the
> backcompat indexes are created, but that's OK. I'll create a new RC this
> evening.
> >
> > Joel Bernstein
> > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 4:44 PM, jim ferenczi 
> wrote:
> > Joel,
> > The backcompat indexes are not added for a minor release. They are added
> on the first bugfix release on the minor branch. There is a note in the
> TODO:
> > "Make sure that the backcompat index for the previous release has been
> added to the release branch. (Note that this will ordinarily not have been
> done if the current release is X.Y.1, i.e. the first bugfix release off the
> stable branch.) See the post-release section "Generate Backcompat Indexes"
> below - remember you'll be generating an index for the previous release."
> >
> > I just pushed the backcompat indices in the release branch. You'll need
> to generate a new release candidate though.
> >
> > 2017-04-09 3:15 GMT+02:00 Ishan Chattopadhyaya <
> ichattopadhy...@gmail.com>:
> > No, this has not changed. I think backcompat indexes for the previous
> release was not added. The 6.5.0 's RM might've missed this step.
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 4:45 AM, Joel Bernstein 
> wrote:
> > Looks like I need to add the back compat indexes. In  the releaseTodo
> this is post release activity but it looks that has changed.
> >
> > Joel Bernstein
> > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 6:58 PM, Joel Bernstein 
> wrote:
> > I don't believe I've missed any steps listed:
> > https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ReleaseTodo
> >
> > Joel Bernstein
> > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 6:56 PM, Joel Bernstein 
> wrote:
> > Ok, the keys appear to be sorted out now. Smoke test now gets much
> further but fails with the error below. I'll go back see if I've missed a
> step...
> > Releases that don't seem to be tested:
> >
> >   6.5.0
> >
> > Traceback (most recent call last):
> >
> >   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1476, in 
> >
> > main()
> >
> >   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1420, in main
> >
> > smokeTest(c.java, c.url, c.revision, c.version, c.tmp_dir,
> c.is_signed, ' '.join(c.test_args))
> >
> >   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1458, in smokeTest
> >
> > unpackAndVerify(java, 'lucene', tmpDir, 'lucene-%s-src.tgz' %
> version, gitRevision, version, testArgs, baseURL)
> >
> >   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 622, in
> unpackAndVerify
> >
> > verifyUnpacked(java, project, artifact, unpackPath, gitRevision,
> version, testArgs, tmpDir, baseURL)
> >
> >   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 768, in
> verifyUnpacked
> >
> > 

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Joel Bernstein]

It may have slipped through the cracks because I started a vote on a Sunday
night, but I cut RC1 last night. The vote is underway.

Joel Bernstein
http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 11:41 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:

> Le lun. 10 avr. 2017 à 17:21, Steve Rowe  a écrit :
>
>> I think it’s time to change the ReleaseToDo to tell RMs to always
>> generate the backcompat indexes on the release branch, regardless of
>> whether the current release is a bugfix release.
>>
>
> +1 to making the release process more consistent
>

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Adrien Grand]

Le lun. 10 avr. 2017 à 17:21, Steve Rowe  a écrit :

> I think it’s time to change the ReleaseToDo to tell RMs to always generate
> the backcompat indexes on the release branch, regardless of whether the
> current release is a bugfix release.
>

+1 to making the release process more consistent

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Steve Rowe]

It’s not true that “we cannot test the backcompatibility of the 6.5.0 branch 
with itself”.  After releasing a *.0 releae, the RM can just set the release 
branch version to *.1, and then there are no issues with adding the *.0 
backcompat indexes.

I believe the real reason these don’t get added to the release branches is 
economy of effort.  It’s not certain that there will be a *.1 release after a 
*.0 release, so why bother?

This is a constant source of confusion, though.  Effort is definitely not 
economized when considering an RM who’s never done a bugfix release before.

Some perspective: 8/12 of the 5.X and 6.X relase branches had, or will have 
(6.5.1), at least one bugfix release.  It’s now the *ordinary* case that 
release branches will get a bugfix release.

I think it’s time to change the ReleaseToDo to tell RMs to always generate the 
backcompat indexes on the release branch, regardless of whether the current 
release is a bugfix release.

--
Steve
www.lucidworks.com

> On Apr 9, 2017, at 6:05 PM, jim ferenczi  wrote:
> 
> Ok sorry I should have been more specific. The backcompat tests are not 
> created on the release branch for the first minor release (eg. 6.5.0). They 
> are only created for the master branch and the 6x branch. Then during the 
> first bugfix of the current release branch (eg. 6.5.1) we push the backcompat 
> test directly on the release branch. This is not done before because we 
> cannot test the backcompatibitily of the 6.5.0 branch with itself. 
> 
> 2017-04-09 22:57 GMT+02:00 Joel Bernstein :
> Thanks Jim, I don't quite understand the rational for when the backcompat 
> indexes are created, but that's OK. I'll create a new RC this evening. 
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> 
> On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 4:44 PM, jim ferenczi  wrote:
> Joel,
> The backcompat indexes are not added for a minor release. They are added on 
> the first bugfix release on the minor branch. There is a note in the TODO:
> "Make sure that the backcompat index for the previous release has been added 
> to the release branch. (Note that this will ordinarily not have been done if 
> the current release is X.Y.1, i.e. the first bugfix release off the stable 
> branch.) See the post-release section "Generate Backcompat Indexes" below - 
> remember you'll be generating an index for the previous release."
> 
> I just pushed the backcompat indices in the release branch. You'll need to 
> generate a new release candidate though.
> 
> 2017-04-09 3:15 GMT+02:00 Ishan Chattopadhyaya :
> No, this has not changed. I think backcompat indexes for the previous release 
> was not added. The 6.5.0 's RM might've missed this step.
> 
> On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 4:45 AM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
> Looks like I need to add the back compat indexes. In  the releaseTodo this is 
> post release activity but it looks that has changed.
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> 
> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 6:58 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
> I don't believe I've missed any steps listed:
> https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ReleaseTodo
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> 
> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 6:56 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
> Ok, the keys appear to be sorted out now. Smoke test now gets much further 
> but fails with the error below. I'll go back see if I've missed a step...
> Releases that don't seem to be tested:
> 
>   6.5.0
> 
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> 
>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1476, in 
> 
> main()
> 
>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1420, in main
> 
> smokeTest(c.java, c.url, c.revision, c.version, c.tmp_dir, c.is_signed, ' 
> '.join(c.test_args))
> 
>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1458, in smokeTest
> 
> unpackAndVerify(java, 'lucene', tmpDir, 'lucene-%s-src.tgz' % version, 
> gitRevision, version, testArgs, baseURL)
> 
>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 622, in unpackAndVerify
> 
> verifyUnpacked(java, project, artifact, unpackPath, gitRevision, version, 
> testArgs, tmpDir, baseURL)
> 
>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 768, in verifyUnpacked
> 
> confirmAllReleasesAreTestedForBackCompat(version, unpackPath)
> 
>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1396, in 
> confirmAllReleasesAreTestedForBackCompat
> 
> raise RuntimeError('some releases are not tested by 
> TestBackwardsCompatibility?')
> 
> RuntimeError: some releases are not tested by TestBackwardsCompatibility?
> 
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> 
> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 2:53 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
> My key has appeared: http://home.apache.org/keys/group/lucene.asc.
> 
> I'll work on an RC this evening.
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> 

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Joel Bernstein]

Ok, that makes perfect sense. Thanks!

Joel Bernstein
http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 6:05 PM, jim ferenczi  wrote:

> Ok sorry I should have been more specific. The backcompat tests are not
> created on the release branch for the first minor release (eg. 6.5.0). They
> are only created for the master branch and the 6x branch. Then during the
> first bugfix of the current release branch (eg. 6.5.1) we push the
> backcompat test directly on the release branch. This is not done before
> because we cannot test the backcompatibitily of the 6.5.0 branch with
> itself.
>
> 2017-04-09 22:57 GMT+02:00 Joel Bernstein :
>
>> Thanks Jim, I don't quite understand the rational for when the backcompat
>> indexes are created, but that's OK. I'll create a new RC this evening.
>>
>> Joel Bernstein
>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 4:44 PM, jim ferenczi 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Joel,
>>> The backcompat indexes are not added for a minor release. They are added
>>> on the first bugfix release on the minor branch. There is a note in the
>>> TODO:
>>> "*Make sure that the backcompat index for the previous release has been
>>> added to the release branch. (Note that this will ordinarily not have been
>>> done if the current release is X.Y.1, i.e. the first bugfix release off the
>>> stable branch.) See the post-release section "Generate Backcompat Indexes"
>>> below - remember you'll be generating an index for the previous release.*
>>> "
>>>
>>> I just pushed the backcompat indices in the release branch. You'll need
>>> to generate a new release candidate though.
>>>
>>> 2017-04-09 3:15 GMT+02:00 Ishan Chattopadhyaya <
>>> ichattopadhy...@gmail.com>:
>>>
 No, this has not changed. I think backcompat indexes for the previous
 release was not added. The 6.5.0 's RM might've missed this step.

 On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 4:45 AM, Joel Bernstein 
 wrote:

> Looks like I need to add the back compat indexes. In  the releaseTodo
> this is post release activity but it looks that has changed.
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 6:58 PM, Joel Bernstein 
> wrote:
>
>> I don't believe I've missed any steps listed:
>> https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ReleaseTodo
>>
>> Joel Bernstein
>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 6:56 PM, Joel Bernstein 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Ok, the keys appear to be sorted out now. Smoke test now gets much
>>> further but fails with the error below. I'll go back see if I've missed 
>>> a
>>> step...
>>>
>>> Releases that don't seem to be tested:
>>>
>>>   6.5.0
>>>
>>> Traceback (most recent call last):
>>>
>>>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1476, in
>>> 
>>>
>>> main()
>>>
>>>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1420, in main
>>>
>>> smokeTest(c.java, c.url, c.revision, c.version, c.tmp_dir,
>>> c.is_signed, ' '.join(c.test_args))
>>>
>>>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1458, in
>>> smokeTest
>>>
>>> unpackAndVerify(java, 'lucene', tmpDir, 'lucene-%s-src.tgz' %
>>> version, gitRevision, version, testArgs, baseURL)
>>>
>>>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 622, in
>>> unpackAndVerify
>>>
>>> verifyUnpacked(java, project, artifact, unpackPath, gitRevision,
>>> version, testArgs, tmpDir, baseURL)
>>>
>>>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 768, in
>>> verifyUnpacked
>>>
>>> confirmAllReleasesAreTestedForBackCompat(version, unpackPath)
>>>
>>>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1396, in
>>> confirmAllReleasesAreTestedForBackCompat
>>>
>>> raise RuntimeError('some releases are not tested by
>>> TestBackwardsCompatibility?')
>>>
>>> RuntimeError: some releases are not tested by
>>> TestBackwardsCompatibility?
>>>
>>> Joel Bernstein
>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 2:53 PM, Joel Bernstein 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 My key has appeared: http://home.apache.org/keys/group/lucene.asc.

 I'll work on an RC this evening.

 Joel Bernstein
 http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

 On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 5:33 PM, Joel Bernstein 
 wrote:

> Ok, I've added the PGP fingerprint to my account on id.apache.org.
> I'll wait until step #1 completes.
>
> Then I'll populate the three key files mentioned in Ishan's notes.
>
> Then I'll regenerate the RC.
>
> Joel Bernstein
> 

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[jim ferenczi]

Ok sorry I should have been more specific. The backcompat tests are not
created on the release branch for the first minor release (eg. 6.5.0). They
are only created for the master branch and the 6x branch. Then during the
first bugfix of the current release branch (eg. 6.5.1) we push the
backcompat test directly on the release branch. This is not done before
because we cannot test the backcompatibitily of the 6.5.0 branch with
itself.

2017-04-09 22:57 GMT+02:00 Joel Bernstein :

> Thanks Jim, I don't quite understand the rational for when the backcompat
> indexes are created, but that's OK. I'll create a new RC this evening.
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 4:44 PM, jim ferenczi 
> wrote:
>
>> Joel,
>> The backcompat indexes are not added for a minor release. They are added
>> on the first bugfix release on the minor branch. There is a note in the
>> TODO:
>> "*Make sure that the backcompat index for the previous release has been
>> added to the release branch. (Note that this will ordinarily not have been
>> done if the current release is X.Y.1, i.e. the first bugfix release off the
>> stable branch.) See the post-release section "Generate Backcompat Indexes"
>> below - remember you'll be generating an index for the previous release.*
>> "
>>
>> I just pushed the backcompat indices in the release branch. You'll need
>> to generate a new release candidate though.
>>
>> 2017-04-09 3:15 GMT+02:00 Ishan Chattopadhyaya > >:
>>
>>> No, this has not changed. I think backcompat indexes for the previous
>>> release was not added. The 6.5.0 's RM might've missed this step.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 4:45 AM, Joel Bernstein 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Looks like I need to add the back compat indexes. In  the releaseTodo
 this is post release activity but it looks that has changed.

 Joel Bernstein
 http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

 On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 6:58 PM, Joel Bernstein 
 wrote:

> I don't believe I've missed any steps listed:
> https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ReleaseTodo
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 6:56 PM, Joel Bernstein 
> wrote:
>
>> Ok, the keys appear to be sorted out now. Smoke test now gets much
>> further but fails with the error below. I'll go back see if I've missed a
>> step...
>>
>> Releases that don't seem to be tested:
>>
>>   6.5.0
>>
>> Traceback (most recent call last):
>>
>>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1476, in
>> 
>>
>> main()
>>
>>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1420, in main
>>
>> smokeTest(c.java, c.url, c.revision, c.version, c.tmp_dir,
>> c.is_signed, ' '.join(c.test_args))
>>
>>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1458, in
>> smokeTest
>>
>> unpackAndVerify(java, 'lucene', tmpDir, 'lucene-%s-src.tgz' %
>> version, gitRevision, version, testArgs, baseURL)
>>
>>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 622, in
>> unpackAndVerify
>>
>> verifyUnpacked(java, project, artifact, unpackPath, gitRevision,
>> version, testArgs, tmpDir, baseURL)
>>
>>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 768, in
>> verifyUnpacked
>>
>> confirmAllReleasesAreTestedForBackCompat(version, unpackPath)
>>
>>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1396, in
>> confirmAllReleasesAreTestedForBackCompat
>>
>> raise RuntimeError('some releases are not tested by
>> TestBackwardsCompatibility?')
>>
>> RuntimeError: some releases are not tested by
>> TestBackwardsCompatibility?
>>
>> Joel Bernstein
>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 2:53 PM, Joel Bernstein 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> My key has appeared: http://home.apache.org/keys/group/lucene.asc.
>>>
>>> I'll work on an RC this evening.
>>>
>>> Joel Bernstein
>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 5:33 PM, Joel Bernstein 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Ok, I've added the PGP fingerprint to my account on id.apache.org.
 I'll wait until step #1 completes.

 Then I'll populate the three key files mentioned in Ishan's notes.

 Then I'll regenerate the RC.

 Joel Bernstein
 http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

 On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Joel Bernstein 
 wrote:

> I need to get me public key into my profile on id.apache.org.
> I'll work on that first.
>
> Joel Bernstein
> 

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Joel Bernstein]

Thanks Jim, I don't quite understand the rational for when the backcompat
indexes are created, but that's OK. I'll create a new RC this evening.

Joel Bernstein
http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 4:44 PM, jim ferenczi  wrote:

> Joel,
> The backcompat indexes are not added for a minor release. They are added
> on the first bugfix release on the minor branch. There is a note in the
> TODO:
> "*Make sure that the backcompat index for the previous release has been
> added to the release branch. (Note that this will ordinarily not have been
> done if the current release is X.Y.1, i.e. the first bugfix release off the
> stable branch.) See the post-release section "Generate Backcompat Indexes"
> below - remember you'll be generating an index for the previous release.*"
>
> I just pushed the backcompat indices in the release branch. You'll need to
> generate a new release candidate though.
>
> 2017-04-09 3:15 GMT+02:00 Ishan Chattopadhyaya 
> :
>
>> No, this has not changed. I think backcompat indexes for the previous
>> release was not added. The 6.5.0 's RM might've missed this step.
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 4:45 AM, Joel Bernstein 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Looks like I need to add the back compat indexes. In  the releaseTodo
>>> this is post release activity but it looks that has changed.
>>>
>>> Joel Bernstein
>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 6:58 PM, Joel Bernstein 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 I don't believe I've missed any steps listed:
 https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ReleaseTodo

 Joel Bernstein
 http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

 On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 6:56 PM, Joel Bernstein 
 wrote:

> Ok, the keys appear to be sorted out now. Smoke test now gets much
> further but fails with the error below. I'll go back see if I've missed a
> step...
>
> Releases that don't seem to be tested:
>
>   6.5.0
>
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>
>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1476, in 
>
> main()
>
>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1420, in main
>
> smokeTest(c.java, c.url, c.revision, c.version, c.tmp_dir,
> c.is_signed, ' '.join(c.test_args))
>
>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1458, in
> smokeTest
>
> unpackAndVerify(java, 'lucene', tmpDir, 'lucene-%s-src.tgz' %
> version, gitRevision, version, testArgs, baseURL)
>
>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 622, in
> unpackAndVerify
>
> verifyUnpacked(java, project, artifact, unpackPath, gitRevision,
> version, testArgs, tmpDir, baseURL)
>
>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 768, in
> verifyUnpacked
>
> confirmAllReleasesAreTestedForBackCompat(version, unpackPath)
>
>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1396, in
> confirmAllReleasesAreTestedForBackCompat
>
> raise RuntimeError('some releases are not tested by
> TestBackwardsCompatibility?')
>
> RuntimeError: some releases are not tested by
> TestBackwardsCompatibility?
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 2:53 PM, Joel Bernstein 
> wrote:
>
>> My key has appeared: http://home.apache.org/keys/group/lucene.asc.
>>
>> I'll work on an RC this evening.
>>
>> Joel Bernstein
>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 5:33 PM, Joel Bernstein 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Ok, I've added the PGP fingerprint to my account on id.apache.org.
>>> I'll wait until step #1 completes.
>>>
>>> Then I'll populate the three key files mentioned in Ishan's notes.
>>>
>>> Then I'll regenerate the RC.
>>>
>>> Joel Bernstein
>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Joel Bernstein 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 I need to get me public key into my profile on id.apache.org. I'll
 work on that first.

 Joel Bernstein
 http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

 On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 4:55 PM, Steve Rowe 
 wrote:

> Joel,
>
>
> > On Apr 7, 2017, at 4:36 PM, Steve Rowe  wrote:
> >
> > a key generated with gpg2 won’t be visible to gpg.
>
> Lower-impact fix (maybe) than symlinking - this will make your
> public key visible to ‘gpg’:
>
> $ gpg --recv-key EE64CB1E
>
> --
> Steve
> www.lucidworks.com
> 
> -
> To 

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[jim ferenczi]

Joel,
The backcompat indexes are not added for a minor release. They are added on
the first bugfix release on the minor branch. There is a note in the TODO:
"*Make sure that the backcompat index for the previous release has been
added to the release branch. (Note that this will ordinarily not have been
done if the current release is X.Y.1, i.e. the first bugfix release off the
stable branch.) See the post-release section "Generate Backcompat Indexes"
below - remember you'll be generating an index for the previous release.*"

I just pushed the backcompat indices in the release branch. You'll need to
generate a new release candidate though.

2017-04-09 3:15 GMT+02:00 Ishan Chattopadhyaya :

> No, this has not changed. I think backcompat indexes for the previous
> release was not added. The 6.5.0 's RM might've missed this step.
>
> On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 4:45 AM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
>
>> Looks like I need to add the back compat indexes. In  the releaseTodo
>> this is post release activity but it looks that has changed.
>>
>> Joel Bernstein
>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 6:58 PM, Joel Bernstein 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't believe I've missed any steps listed:
>>> https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ReleaseTodo
>>>
>>> Joel Bernstein
>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 6:56 PM, Joel Bernstein 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Ok, the keys appear to be sorted out now. Smoke test now gets much
 further but fails with the error below. I'll go back see if I've missed a
 step...

 Releases that don't seem to be tested:

   6.5.0

 Traceback (most recent call last):

   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1476, in 

 main()

   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1420, in main

 smokeTest(c.java, c.url, c.revision, c.version, c.tmp_dir,
 c.is_signed, ' '.join(c.test_args))

   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1458, in smokeTest

 unpackAndVerify(java, 'lucene', tmpDir, 'lucene-%s-src.tgz' %
 version, gitRevision, version, testArgs, baseURL)

   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 622, in
 unpackAndVerify

 verifyUnpacked(java, project, artifact, unpackPath, gitRevision,
 version, testArgs, tmpDir, baseURL)

   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 768, in
 verifyUnpacked

 confirmAllReleasesAreTestedForBackCompat(version, unpackPath)

   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1396, in
 confirmAllReleasesAreTestedForBackCompat

 raise RuntimeError('some releases are not tested by
 TestBackwardsCompatibility?')

 RuntimeError: some releases are not tested by
 TestBackwardsCompatibility?

 Joel Bernstein
 http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

 On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 2:53 PM, Joel Bernstein 
 wrote:

> My key has appeared: http://home.apache.org/keys/group/lucene.asc.
>
> I'll work on an RC this evening.
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 5:33 PM, Joel Bernstein 
> wrote:
>
>> Ok, I've added the PGP fingerprint to my account on id.apache.org.
>> I'll wait until step #1 completes.
>>
>> Then I'll populate the three key files mentioned in Ishan's notes.
>>
>> Then I'll regenerate the RC.
>>
>> Joel Bernstein
>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Joel Bernstein 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I need to get me public key into my profile on id.apache.org. I'll
>>> work on that first.
>>>
>>> Joel Bernstein
>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 4:55 PM, Steve Rowe  wrote:
>>>
 Joel,


 > On Apr 7, 2017, at 4:36 PM, Steve Rowe  wrote:
 >
 > a key generated with gpg2 won’t be visible to gpg.

 Lower-impact fix (maybe) than symlinking - this will make your
 public key visible to ‘gpg’:

 $ gpg --recv-key EE64CB1E

 --
 Steve
 www.lucidworks.com
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org


>>>
>>
>

>>>
>>
>

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Ishan Chattopadhyaya]

No, this has not changed. I think backcompat indexes for the previous
release was not added. The 6.5.0 's RM might've missed this step.

On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 4:45 AM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:

> Looks like I need to add the back compat indexes. In  the releaseTodo this
> is post release activity but it looks that has changed.
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 6:58 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
>
>> I don't believe I've missed any steps listed:
>> https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ReleaseTodo
>>
>> Joel Bernstein
>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 6:56 PM, Joel Bernstein 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Ok, the keys appear to be sorted out now. Smoke test now gets much
>>> further but fails with the error below. I'll go back see if I've missed a
>>> step...
>>>
>>> Releases that don't seem to be tested:
>>>
>>>   6.5.0
>>>
>>> Traceback (most recent call last):
>>>
>>>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1476, in 
>>>
>>> main()
>>>
>>>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1420, in main
>>>
>>> smokeTest(c.java, c.url, c.revision, c.version, c.tmp_dir,
>>> c.is_signed, ' '.join(c.test_args))
>>>
>>>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1458, in smokeTest
>>>
>>> unpackAndVerify(java, 'lucene', tmpDir, 'lucene-%s-src.tgz' %
>>> version, gitRevision, version, testArgs, baseURL)
>>>
>>>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 622, in
>>> unpackAndVerify
>>>
>>> verifyUnpacked(java, project, artifact, unpackPath, gitRevision,
>>> version, testArgs, tmpDir, baseURL)
>>>
>>>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 768, in
>>> verifyUnpacked
>>>
>>> confirmAllReleasesAreTestedForBackCompat(version, unpackPath)
>>>
>>>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1396, in
>>> confirmAllReleasesAreTestedForBackCompat
>>>
>>> raise RuntimeError('some releases are not tested by
>>> TestBackwardsCompatibility?')
>>>
>>> RuntimeError: some releases are not tested by TestBackwardsCompatibility?
>>>
>>> Joel Bernstein
>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 2:53 PM, Joel Bernstein 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 My key has appeared: http://home.apache.org/keys/group/lucene.asc.

 I'll work on an RC this evening.

 Joel Bernstein
 http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

 On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 5:33 PM, Joel Bernstein 
 wrote:

> Ok, I've added the PGP fingerprint to my account on id.apache.org.
> I'll wait until step #1 completes.
>
> Then I'll populate the three key files mentioned in Ishan's notes.
>
> Then I'll regenerate the RC.
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Joel Bernstein 
> wrote:
>
>> I need to get me public key into my profile on id.apache.org. I'll
>> work on that first.
>>
>> Joel Bernstein
>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 4:55 PM, Steve Rowe  wrote:
>>
>>> Joel,
>>>
>>>
>>> > On Apr 7, 2017, at 4:36 PM, Steve Rowe  wrote:
>>> >
>>> > a key generated with gpg2 won’t be visible to gpg.
>>>
>>> Lower-impact fix (maybe) than symlinking - this will make your
>>> public key visible to ‘gpg’:
>>>
>>> $ gpg --recv-key EE64CB1E
>>>
>>> --
>>> Steve
>>> www.lucidworks.com
>>> 
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>

>>>
>>
>

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Joel Bernstein]

Looks like I need to add the back compat indexes. In  the releaseTodo this
is post release activity but it looks that has changed.

Joel Bernstein
http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 6:58 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:

> I don't believe I've missed any steps listed:
> https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ReleaseTodo
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 6:56 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
>
>> Ok, the keys appear to be sorted out now. Smoke test now gets much
>> further but fails with the error below. I'll go back see if I've missed a
>> step...
>>
>> Releases that don't seem to be tested:
>>
>>   6.5.0
>>
>> Traceback (most recent call last):
>>
>>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1476, in 
>>
>> main()
>>
>>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1420, in main
>>
>> smokeTest(c.java, c.url, c.revision, c.version, c.tmp_dir,
>> c.is_signed, ' '.join(c.test_args))
>>
>>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1458, in smokeTest
>>
>> unpackAndVerify(java, 'lucene', tmpDir, 'lucene-%s-src.tgz' %
>> version, gitRevision, version, testArgs, baseURL)
>>
>>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 622, in
>> unpackAndVerify
>>
>> verifyUnpacked(java, project, artifact, unpackPath, gitRevision,
>> version, testArgs, tmpDir, baseURL)
>>
>>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 768, in
>> verifyUnpacked
>>
>> confirmAllReleasesAreTestedForBackCompat(version, unpackPath)
>>
>>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1396, in
>> confirmAllReleasesAreTestedForBackCompat
>>
>> raise RuntimeError('some releases are not tested by
>> TestBackwardsCompatibility?')
>>
>> RuntimeError: some releases are not tested by TestBackwardsCompatibility?
>>
>> Joel Bernstein
>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 2:53 PM, Joel Bernstein 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> My key has appeared: http://home.apache.org/keys/group/lucene.asc.
>>>
>>> I'll work on an RC this evening.
>>>
>>> Joel Bernstein
>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 5:33 PM, Joel Bernstein 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Ok, I've added the PGP fingerprint to my account on id.apache.org.
 I'll wait until step #1 completes.

 Then I'll populate the three key files mentioned in Ishan's notes.

 Then I'll regenerate the RC.

 Joel Bernstein
 http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

 On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Joel Bernstein 
 wrote:

> I need to get me public key into my profile on id.apache.org. I'll
> work on that first.
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 4:55 PM, Steve Rowe  wrote:
>
>> Joel,
>>
>>
>> > On Apr 7, 2017, at 4:36 PM, Steve Rowe  wrote:
>> >
>> > a key generated with gpg2 won’t be visible to gpg.
>>
>> Lower-impact fix (maybe) than symlinking - this will make your public
>> key visible to ‘gpg’:
>>
>> $ gpg --recv-key EE64CB1E
>>
>> --
>> Steve
>> www.lucidworks.com
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>>
>>
>

>>>
>>
>

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Joel Bernstein]

I don't believe I've missed any steps listed:
https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ReleaseTodo

Joel Bernstein
http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 6:56 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:

> Ok, the keys appear to be sorted out now. Smoke test now gets much further
> but fails with the error below. I'll go back see if I've missed a step...
>
> Releases that don't seem to be tested:
>
>   6.5.0
>
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>
>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1476, in 
>
> main()
>
>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1420, in main
>
> smokeTest(c.java, c.url, c.revision, c.version, c.tmp_dir,
> c.is_signed, ' '.join(c.test_args))
>
>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1458, in smokeTest
>
> unpackAndVerify(java, 'lucene', tmpDir, 'lucene-%s-src.tgz' % version,
> gitRevision, version, testArgs, baseURL)
>
>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 622, in
> unpackAndVerify
>
> verifyUnpacked(java, project, artifact, unpackPath, gitRevision,
> version, testArgs, tmpDir, baseURL)
>
>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 768, in
> verifyUnpacked
>
> confirmAllReleasesAreTestedForBackCompat(version, unpackPath)
>
>   File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1396, in
> confirmAllReleasesAreTestedForBackCompat
>
> raise RuntimeError('some releases are not tested by
> TestBackwardsCompatibility?')
>
> RuntimeError: some releases are not tested by TestBackwardsCompatibility?
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 2:53 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
>
>> My key has appeared: http://home.apache.org/keys/group/lucene.asc.
>>
>> I'll work on an RC this evening.
>>
>> Joel Bernstein
>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 5:33 PM, Joel Bernstein 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Ok, I've added the PGP fingerprint to my account on id.apache.org. I'll
>>> wait until step #1 completes.
>>>
>>> Then I'll populate the three key files mentioned in Ishan's notes.
>>>
>>> Then I'll regenerate the RC.
>>>
>>> Joel Bernstein
>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Joel Bernstein 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 I need to get me public key into my profile on id.apache.org. I'll
 work on that first.

 Joel Bernstein
 http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

 On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 4:55 PM, Steve Rowe  wrote:

> Joel,
>
>
> > On Apr 7, 2017, at 4:36 PM, Steve Rowe  wrote:
> >
> > a key generated with gpg2 won’t be visible to gpg.
>
> Lower-impact fix (maybe) than symlinking - this will make your public
> key visible to ‘gpg’:
>
> $ gpg --recv-key EE64CB1E
>
> --
> Steve
> www.lucidworks.com
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>
>

>>>
>>
>

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Joel Bernstein]

Ok, the keys appear to be sorted out now. Smoke test now gets much further
but fails with the error below. I'll go back see if I've missed a step...

Releases that don't seem to be tested:

  6.5.0

Traceback (most recent call last):

  File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1476, in 

main()

  File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1420, in main

smokeTest(c.java, c.url, c.revision, c.version, c.tmp_dir, c.is_signed,
' '.join(c.test_args))

  File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1458, in smokeTest

unpackAndVerify(java, 'lucene', tmpDir, 'lucene-%s-src.tgz' % version,
gitRevision, version, testArgs, baseURL)

  File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 622, in unpackAndVerify

verifyUnpacked(java, project, artifact, unpackPath, gitRevision,
version, testArgs, tmpDir, baseURL)

  File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 768, in verifyUnpacked

confirmAllReleasesAreTestedForBackCompat(version, unpackPath)

  File "dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", line 1396, in
confirmAllReleasesAreTestedForBackCompat

raise RuntimeError('some releases are not tested by
TestBackwardsCompatibility?')

RuntimeError: some releases are not tested by TestBackwardsCompatibility?

Joel Bernstein
http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 2:53 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:

> My key has appeared: http://home.apache.org/keys/group/lucene.asc.
>
> I'll work on an RC this evening.
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 5:33 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
>
>> Ok, I've added the PGP fingerprint to my account on id.apache.org. I'll
>> wait until step #1 completes.
>>
>> Then I'll populate the three key files mentioned in Ishan's notes.
>>
>> Then I'll regenerate the RC.
>>
>> Joel Bernstein
>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Joel Bernstein 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I need to get me public key into my profile on id.apache.org. I'll work
>>> on that first.
>>>
>>> Joel Bernstein
>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 4:55 PM, Steve Rowe  wrote:
>>>
 Joel,


 > On Apr 7, 2017, at 4:36 PM, Steve Rowe  wrote:
 >
 > a key generated with gpg2 won’t be visible to gpg.

 Lower-impact fix (maybe) than symlinking - this will make your public
 key visible to ‘gpg’:

 $ gpg --recv-key EE64CB1E

 --
 Steve
 www.lucidworks.com
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org


>>>
>>
>

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Joel Bernstein]

My key has appeared: http://home.apache.org/keys/group/lucene.asc.

I'll work on an RC this evening.

Joel Bernstein
http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 5:33 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:

> Ok, I've added the PGP fingerprint to my account on id.apache.org. I'll
> wait until step #1 completes.
>
> Then I'll populate the three key files mentioned in Ishan's notes.
>
> Then I'll regenerate the RC.
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
>
>> I need to get me public key into my profile on id.apache.org. I'll work
>> on that first.
>>
>> Joel Bernstein
>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 4:55 PM, Steve Rowe  wrote:
>>
>>> Joel,
>>>
>>>
>>> > On Apr 7, 2017, at 4:36 PM, Steve Rowe  wrote:
>>> >
>>> > a key generated with gpg2 won’t be visible to gpg.
>>>
>>> Lower-impact fix (maybe) than symlinking - this will make your public
>>> key visible to ‘gpg’:
>>>
>>> $ gpg --recv-key EE64CB1E
>>>
>>> --
>>> Steve
>>> www.lucidworks.com
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Joel Bernstein]

Ok, I've added the PGP fingerprint to my account on id.apache.org. I'll
wait until step #1 completes.

Then I'll populate the three key files mentioned in Ishan's notes.

Then I'll regenerate the RC.

Joel Bernstein
http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:

> I need to get me public key into my profile on id.apache.org. I'll work
> on that first.
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 4:55 PM, Steve Rowe  wrote:
>
>> Joel,
>>
>>
>> > On Apr 7, 2017, at 4:36 PM, Steve Rowe  wrote:
>> >
>> > a key generated with gpg2 won’t be visible to gpg.
>>
>> Lower-impact fix (maybe) than symlinking - this will make your public key
>> visible to ‘gpg’:
>>
>> $ gpg --recv-key EE64CB1E
>>
>> --
>> Steve
>> www.lucidworks.com
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>>
>>
>

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Joel Bernstein]

I need to get me public key into my profile on id.apache.org. I'll work on
that first.

Joel Bernstein
http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 4:55 PM, Steve Rowe  wrote:

> Joel,
>
>
> > On Apr 7, 2017, at 4:36 PM, Steve Rowe  wrote:
> >
> > a key generated with gpg2 won’t be visible to gpg.
>
> Lower-impact fix (maybe) than symlinking - this will make your public key
> visible to ‘gpg’:
>
> $ gpg --recv-key EE64CB1E
>
> --
> Steve
> www.lucidworks.com
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>
>

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Steve Rowe]

Joel,


> On Apr 7, 2017, at 4:36 PM, Steve Rowe  wrote:
> 
> a key generated with gpg2 won’t be visible to gpg.

Lower-impact fix (maybe) than symlinking - this will make your public key 
visible to ‘gpg’:

$ gpg --recv-key EE64CB1E 

--
Steve
www.lucidworks.com
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Steve Rowe]

Joel,

The error message means that ‘gpg’ can't find your public key.

I’m guessing that this is because you have both ‘gpg’ and ‘gpg2’ installed on 
your machine.  These maintain separate key stores, so a key generated with gpg2 
won’t be visible to gpg.

Ishan ran into the same issue - you can see how he dealt with it in his 
personal notes: h3 symlinked gpg to gpg2.

(For the future: the Ant build has a property ‘gpg.exe’ that defaults to ‘gpg’; 
you should be able to specify an alternate value when you run 
buildAndPushRelease.py, but at present there is no such support.)

--
Steve
www.lucidworks.com

> On Apr 7, 2017, at 4:20 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
> 
> Currently when the smoke test I get the error:
> 
> gpg: Signature made Fri Apr  7 13:40:58 2017 EDT using RSA key ID EE64CB1E
> 
> gpg: Can't check signature: No public key
> 
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> 
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 3:57 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
> I've got a RC uploaded here: 
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-solr-6.5.1-RC1-revfa827447f5829fe729b779faed675775e3c0b7c8/
> 
> But I'm not sure exactly what needs to be done with the keys.
> 
> I see there is a KEYS file in both the lucene and solr directories. I tried 
> using the commands Ishan mentioned in his documents to add my key to these 
> files but the output looked different then the other keys listed in the file. 
> Here is what my entry looked like:
> 
> pub   4096R/EE64CB1E 2017-04-07
> 
> uid   [ultimate] Joel Bernstein (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
> 
> sig 3EE64CB1E 2017-04-07  Joel Bernstein (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
> 
> 
> sub   4096R/D4FCCE80 2017-04-07
> 
> sig  EE64CB1E 2017-04-07  Joel Bernstein (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-
> 
> Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org
> 
> 
> 
> mQINBFjnqFIBEADxPOfLdqbOsyisRSeDspWKSU7zN1jCgM2oEHGRckBDju53Jat8
> 
> XM2aQ6ndDecFtIbeNzi870jfbFZ0AAWbyqgJ/1bKzcIcr/jE3AqaJR+kIv7AO80V
> 
> oaio/LnWsdAAVZfZfTLGPNGw7UslmuHxwuIgxXRFaYYqiyNWlGJ77bl10MRfOHBG
> 
> 5PmPPuZ3I9XEOTirqVFHFurgYWvwTy0bDmdQMAyEbNBGHKeDEX+givff/LXUVtCC
> 
> iTHf/85knZ85hbOD1yvV11VuaLEvMdhPJTGfrJQKFONAYUmcvSO4h0SjZbb15Hxw
> 
> FFGyESlOTfSe3qs2YiPrKGWYDlukFRiFFbAg0qRa+VqDJSYHEGvu3PBS+laAou89
> 
> 7zzMImo3fOOU2+pas9ZmoIybfyXFfK9fRS4geDclO8BjKzk0GNL8sygCLJZXSebw
> 
> BDsPYCxNOr7TpAAHF5Ju2k5QCPvCUVG3GtXBo69klHXsAwrT/7MFRpIW/ZNdlVAR
> 
> Yt+0d1ANcgkdkDSIeQ0+B/Id4cr2Oiybc3eExDjOCa13wORDbAZ3BL+cwT3A2Y58
> 
> ND2vuV0113hvdtRoyDEmxnoDPkBP0kuA50u1VNSN8tPJHo43q7+uyTpdjtZDpMk5
> 
> woL257KR7tlY5xG1XA82n9CxLncJwnHyRMKYHQ6/OqBGOnPIAucm+c/EGwARAQAB
> 
> tDdKb2VsIEJlcm5zdGVpbiAoQ09ERSBTSUdOSU5HIEtFWSkgPGpiZXJuc3RlQGFw
> 
> YWNoZS5vcmc+iQI3BBMBCgAhBQJY56hSAhsDBQsJCAcDBRUKCQgLBRYCAwEAAh4B
> 
> AheAAAoJEKM20MDuZMseLAwQAIlLr3lCjxU9+H8ER1JqwJMuMxVOqf9VAFUMzYZM
> 
> EP2NClMl+aROOkA2xtD8rF6ZutPeNcz3mcsZQjsIHsUyqePMGL5NNin2baxIqbCN
> 
> 0VU9IVpNIXlwiz6AelHUjtGhQ2Qg2nWgZSvwSHZO3+YqJLcmsaDCFxjVQbNOtfta
> 
> pc8Lfjwg/+4gK+SJmtdi4+HDQQCNYAgEQhoagtXZulK4XGDvJ68p9y2xUR8JBpcC
> 
> PNuQOr8AGGZ3VyoNRa2gGjKj0lC0WkJLB8GmieV7dCjQCdkHQk2qjJlrj4z39M3t
> 
> WgAiYDj6BAbbnugWHyTwQYn2mj6PlYoiivYNNq7LO96SLbINJ/hTHT6HZhM2b6WV
> 
> zzT6z63gTU2eBWxPzfHAeyKl2/8+MOckPYCXjejni4uB5aFPLV9Zmqtij4fefzy5
> 
> gF3zOmJNEMkMjeKQ/I41Gm3vWxaJBKSmG5NO3cvGFWI0o0DEGN+C6W2uqMO+OAE0
> 
> WIqloQSlS2bcJczT/CPGlRZheI5gv+3plHMz0Qv0PZE2DhIi+K8dk19Va0YYLwoP
> 
> MGN/m2jiRxid1ExuO5bL3wCVXdsXWnJM5c8Sbwp9jWpKwoM
> 
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> 
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 2:40 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
> Yep, I've got a release candidate uploading now.
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> 
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Steve Rowe  wrote:
> Hi Joel,
> 
> Your Apache LDAP credentials are used for both Subversion and Git, and all 
> Lucene/Solr committers have commit karma on dist.apache.org.
> 
> From :
> 
> > The official record for PMC membership is the committee-info.txt file,
> > and not the LDAP committee group.
> >
> > The LDAP committee groups are used to grant access to various resources,
> > for example the PMC private mailing lists and the SVN dist/release tree.
> > The LDAP unix groups are also used to grant access to resources, for
> > example SVN and website publication. Therefore all PMC members (as per
> > committee-info.txt) should be members of the corresponding LDAP
> > committee and LDAP unix groups.
> 
> Although the above implies that only PMC members can commit to the Subversion 
> repo on dist.apache.org, see 
> , where ASF Infra granted 
> dist.apache.org commit karma to all Lucene/Solr committers.
> 
> --
> Steve
> www.lucidworks.com
> 
> > On Apr 7, 2017, at 1:15 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
> >
> > I'm building a release 

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Steve Rowe]

Joel,

The KEYS situation is a mess.

Here’s what’s happening:

1. Roughly(?) every 24 hours, the keys stored in LDAP for Lucene/Solr 
committers are automatically exported to 
.  Yours isn’t there yet, but 
will eventually be, assuming you pasted your public key into your profile on 
id.apache.org.

2. When you prepare a release, the target “-dist-keys” in 
{lucene,solr}/build.xml downloads the above-linked lucene.asc and renames it to 
KEYS in the distribution directories.

3. There are static KEYS files on dist.apache.org, that don’t automatically get 
populated with a release: 
, 
, and 
.

Ishan’s personal notes mention how he put his key into the static files in #3.  
To me your entry looks quite similar to some of the other entries in those 
files.

*Important*: you should delay producing your first RC until the #1 process has 
completed, and you see your key in lucene.asc (this gets copied to per-release 
KEYS files, e.g. 

 and 
).
 

--
Steve
www.lucidworks.com

> On Apr 7, 2017, at 3:57 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
> 
> I've got a RC uploaded here: 
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-solr-6.5.1-RC1-revfa827447f5829fe729b779faed675775e3c0b7c8/
> 
> But I'm not sure exactly what needs to be done with the keys.
> 
> I see there is a KEYS file in both the lucene and solr directories. I tried 
> using the commands Ishan mentioned in his documents to add my key to these 
> files but the output looked different then the other keys listed in the file. 
> Here is what my entry looked like:
> 
> pub   4096R/EE64CB1E 2017-04-07
> 
> uid   [ultimate] Joel Bernstein (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
> 
> sig 3EE64CB1E 2017-04-07  Joel Bernstein (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
> 
> 
> sub   4096R/D4FCCE80 2017-04-07
> 
> sig  EE64CB1E 2017-04-07  Joel Bernstein (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-
> 
> Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org
> 
> 
> 
> mQINBFjnqFIBEADxPOfLdqbOsyisRSeDspWKSU7zN1jCgM2oEHGRckBDju53Jat8
> 
> XM2aQ6ndDecFtIbeNzi870jfbFZ0AAWbyqgJ/1bKzcIcr/jE3AqaJR+kIv7AO80V
> 
> oaio/LnWsdAAVZfZfTLGPNGw7UslmuHxwuIgxXRFaYYqiyNWlGJ77bl10MRfOHBG
> 
> 5PmPPuZ3I9XEOTirqVFHFurgYWvwTy0bDmdQMAyEbNBGHKeDEX+givff/LXUVtCC
> 
> iTHf/85knZ85hbOD1yvV11VuaLEvMdhPJTGfrJQKFONAYUmcvSO4h0SjZbb15Hxw
> 
> FFGyESlOTfSe3qs2YiPrKGWYDlukFRiFFbAg0qRa+VqDJSYHEGvu3PBS+laAou89
> 
> 7zzMImo3fOOU2+pas9ZmoIybfyXFfK9fRS4geDclO8BjKzk0GNL8sygCLJZXSebw
> 
> BDsPYCxNOr7TpAAHF5Ju2k5QCPvCUVG3GtXBo69klHXsAwrT/7MFRpIW/ZNdlVAR
> 
> Yt+0d1ANcgkdkDSIeQ0+B/Id4cr2Oiybc3eExDjOCa13wORDbAZ3BL+cwT3A2Y58
> 
> ND2vuV0113hvdtRoyDEmxnoDPkBP0kuA50u1VNSN8tPJHo43q7+uyTpdjtZDpMk5
> 
> woL257KR7tlY5xG1XA82n9CxLncJwnHyRMKYHQ6/OqBGOnPIAucm+c/EGwARAQAB
> 
> tDdKb2VsIEJlcm5zdGVpbiAoQ09ERSBTSUdOSU5HIEtFWSkgPGpiZXJuc3RlQGFw
> 
> YWNoZS5vcmc+iQI3BBMBCgAhBQJY56hSAhsDBQsJCAcDBRUKCQgLBRYCAwEAAh4B
> 
> AheAAAoJEKM20MDuZMseLAwQAIlLr3lCjxU9+H8ER1JqwJMuMxVOqf9VAFUMzYZM
> 
> EP2NClMl+aROOkA2xtD8rF6ZutPeNcz3mcsZQjsIHsUyqePMGL5NNin2baxIqbCN
> 
> 0VU9IVpNIXlwiz6AelHUjtGhQ2Qg2nWgZSvwSHZO3+YqJLcmsaDCFxjVQbNOtfta
> 
> pc8Lfjwg/+4gK+SJmtdi4+HDQQCNYAgEQhoagtXZulK4XGDvJ68p9y2xUR8JBpcC
> 
> PNuQOr8AGGZ3VyoNRa2gGjKj0lC0WkJLB8GmieV7dCjQCdkHQk2qjJlrj4z39M3t
> 
> WgAiYDj6BAbbnugWHyTwQYn2mj6PlYoiivYNNq7LO96SLbINJ/hTHT6HZhM2b6WV
> 
> zzT6z63gTU2eBWxPzfHAeyKl2/8+MOckPYCXjejni4uB5aFPLV9Zmqtij4fefzy5
> 
> gF3zOmJNEMkMjeKQ/I41Gm3vWxaJBKSmG5NO3cvGFWI0o0DEGN+C6W2uqMO+OAE0
> 
> WIqloQSlS2bcJczT/CPGlRZheI5gv+3plHMz0Qv0PZE2DhIi+K8dk19Va0YYLwoP
> 
> MGN/m2jiRxid1ExuO5bL3wCVXdsXWnJM5c8Sbwp9jWpKwoM
> 
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> 
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 2:40 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
> Yep, I've got a release candidate uploading now.
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> 
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Steve Rowe  wrote:
> Hi Joel,
> 
> Your Apache LDAP credentials are used for both Subversion and Git, and all 
> Lucene/Solr committers have commit karma on dist.apache.org.
> 
> From :
> 
> > The official record for PMC membership is the committee-info.txt file,
> > and not the LDAP committee group.
> >
> > The LDAP committee groups are used to grant access to various resources,
> > for example the PMC private mailing lists and the SVN dist/release tree.
> > The LDAP unix groups are also used to grant access to resources, for
> > example SVN and website publication. Therefore 

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Joel Bernstein]

Currently when the smoke test I get the error:

gpg: Signature made Fri Apr  7 13:40:58 2017 EDT using RSA key ID EE64CB1E

gpg: Can't check signature: No public key

Joel Bernstein
http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 3:57 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:

> I've got a RC uploaded here: https://dist.apache.org/
> repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-solr-6.5.1-RC1-revfa827447f5829fe729b779faed6
> 75775e3c0b7c8/
>
> But I'm not sure exactly what needs to be done with the keys.
>
> I see there is a KEYS file in both the lucene and solr directories. I
> tried using the commands Ishan mentioned in his documents to add my key to
> these files but the output looked different then the other keys listed in
> the file. Here is what my entry looked like:
>
> pub   4096R/EE64CB1E 2017-04-07
>
> uid   [ultimate] Joel Bernstein (CODE SIGNING KEY) <
> jbern...@apache.org>
>
> sig 3EE64CB1E 2017-04-07  Joel Bernstein (CODE SIGNING KEY) <
> jbern...@apache.org>
>
> sub   4096R/D4FCCE80 2017-04-07
>
> sig  EE64CB1E 2017-04-07  Joel Bernstein (CODE SIGNING KEY) <
> jbern...@apache.org>
>
>
> -BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-
>
> Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org
>
>
> mQINBFjnqFIBEADxPOfLdqbOsyisRSeDspWKSU7zN1jCgM2oEHGRckBDju53Jat8
>
> XM2aQ6ndDecFtIbeNzi870jfbFZ0AAWbyqgJ/1bKzcIcr/jE3AqaJR+kIv7AO80V
>
> oaio/LnWsdAAVZfZfTLGPNGw7UslmuHxwuIgxXRFaYYqiyNWlGJ77bl10MRfOHBG
>
> 5PmPPuZ3I9XEOTirqVFHFurgYWvwTy0bDmdQMAyEbNBGHKeDEX+givff/LXUVtCC
>
> iTHf/85knZ85hbOD1yvV11VuaLEvMdhPJTGfrJQKFONAYUmcvSO4h0SjZbb15Hxw
>
> FFGyESlOTfSe3qs2YiPrKGWYDlukFRiFFbAg0qRa+VqDJSYHEGvu3PBS+laAou89
>
> 7zzMImo3fOOU2+pas9ZmoIybfyXFfK9fRS4geDclO8BjKzk0GNL8sygCLJZXSebw
>
> BDsPYCxNOr7TpAAHF5Ju2k5QCPvCUVG3GtXBo69klHXsAwrT/7MFRpIW/ZNdlVAR
>
> Yt+0d1ANcgkdkDSIeQ0+B/Id4cr2Oiybc3eExDjOCa13wORDbAZ3BL+cwT3A2Y58
>
> ND2vuV0113hvdtRoyDEmxnoDPkBP0kuA50u1VNSN8tPJHo43q7+uyTpdjtZDpMk5
>
> woL257KR7tlY5xG1XA82n9CxLncJwnHyRMKYHQ6/OqBGOnPIAucm+c/EGwARAQAB
>
> tDdKb2VsIEJlcm5zdGVpbiAoQ09ERSBTSUdOSU5HIEtFWSkgPGpiZXJuc3RlQGFw
>
> YWNoZS5vcmc+iQI3BBMBCgAhBQJY56hSAhsDBQsJCAcDBRUKCQgLBRYCAwEAAh4B
>
> AheAAAoJEKM20MDuZMseLAwQAIlLr3lCjxU9+H8ER1JqwJMuMxVOqf9VAFUMzYZM
>
> EP2NClMl+aROOkA2xtD8rF6ZutPeNcz3mcsZQjsIHsUyqePMGL5NNin2baxIqbCN
>
> 0VU9IVpNIXlwiz6AelHUjtGhQ2Qg2nWgZSvwSHZO3+YqJLcmsaDCFxjVQbNOtfta
>
> pc8Lfjwg/+4gK+SJmtdi4+HDQQCNYAgEQhoagtXZulK4XGDvJ68p9y2xUR8JBpcC
>
> PNuQOr8AGGZ3VyoNRa2gGjKj0lC0WkJLB8GmieV7dCjQCdkHQk2qjJlrj4z39M3t
>
> WgAiYDj6BAbbnugWHyTwQYn2mj6PlYoiivYNNq7LO96SLbINJ/hTHT6HZhM2b6WV
>
> zzT6z63gTU2eBWxPzfHAeyKl2/8+MOckPYCXjejni4uB5aFPLV9Zmqtij4fefzy5
>
> gF3zOmJNEMkMjeKQ/I41Gm3vWxaJBKSmG5NO3cvGFWI0o0DEGN+C6W2uqMO+OAE0
>
> WIqloQSlS2bcJczT/CPGlRZheI5gv+3plHMz0Qv0PZE2DhIi+K8dk19Va0YYLwoP
>
> MGN/m2jiRxid1ExuO5bL3wCVXdsXWnJM5c8Sbwp9jWpKwoM
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 2:40 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
>
>> Yep, I've got a release candidate uploading now.
>>
>> Joel Bernstein
>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Steve Rowe  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Joel,
>>>
>>> Your Apache LDAP credentials are used for both Subversion and Git, and
>>> all Lucene/Solr committers have commit karma on dist.apache.org.
>>>
>>> From :
>>>
>>> > The official record for PMC membership is the committee-info.txt file,
>>> > and not the LDAP committee group.
>>> >
>>> > The LDAP committee groups are used to grant access to various
>>> resources,
>>> > for example the PMC private mailing lists and the SVN dist/release
>>> tree.
>>> > The LDAP unix groups are also used to grant access to resources, for
>>> > example SVN and website publication. Therefore all PMC members (as per
>>> > committee-info.txt) should be members of the corresponding LDAP
>>> > committee and LDAP unix groups.
>>>
>>> Although the above implies that only PMC members can commit to the
>>> Subversion repo on dist.apache.org, see >> a/browse/INFRA-6813>, where ASF Infra granted dist.apache.org commit
>>> karma to all Lucene/Solr committers.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Steve
>>> www.lucidworks.com
>>>
>>> > On Apr 7, 2017, at 1:15 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
>>> >
>>> > I'm building a release candidate locally. Then I'll need to push it to
>>> dist.apache.org.
>>> >
>>> > This is apparently done through SVN. Do I need special credentials to
>>> commit to dist.apache.org?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Joel Bernstein
>>> > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 11:43 AM, Joel Bernstein 
>>> wrote:
>>> > Thanks!
>>> >
>>> > Joel Bernstein
>>> > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Adrien Grand 
>>> wrote:
>>> > I signed your key and uploaded it again.
>>> >
>>> > Le ven. 7 avr. 2017 à 17:28, Adrien Grand  a écrit
>>> :
>>> > addVersion should indeed be run on 

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Joel Bernstein]

I've got a RC uploaded here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-solr-6.5.1-RC1-revfa827447f5829fe729b779faed675775e3c0b7c8/

But I'm not sure exactly what needs to be done with the keys.

I see there is a KEYS file in both the lucene and solr directories. I tried
using the commands Ishan mentioned in his documents to add my key to these
files but the output looked different then the other keys listed in the
file. Here is what my entry looked like:

pub   4096R/EE64CB1E 2017-04-07

uid   [ultimate] Joel Bernstein (CODE SIGNING KEY) 

sig 3EE64CB1E 2017-04-07  Joel Bernstein (CODE SIGNING KEY) <
jbern...@apache.org>

sub   4096R/D4FCCE80 2017-04-07

sig  EE64CB1E 2017-04-07  Joel Bernstein (CODE SIGNING KEY) <
jbern...@apache.org>


-BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-

Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org


mQINBFjnqFIBEADxPOfLdqbOsyisRSeDspWKSU7zN1jCgM2oEHGRckBDju53Jat8

XM2aQ6ndDecFtIbeNzi870jfbFZ0AAWbyqgJ/1bKzcIcr/jE3AqaJR+kIv7AO80V

oaio/LnWsdAAVZfZfTLGPNGw7UslmuHxwuIgxXRFaYYqiyNWlGJ77bl10MRfOHBG

5PmPPuZ3I9XEOTirqVFHFurgYWvwTy0bDmdQMAyEbNBGHKeDEX+givff/LXUVtCC

iTHf/85knZ85hbOD1yvV11VuaLEvMdhPJTGfrJQKFONAYUmcvSO4h0SjZbb15Hxw

FFGyESlOTfSe3qs2YiPrKGWYDlukFRiFFbAg0qRa+VqDJSYHEGvu3PBS+laAou89

7zzMImo3fOOU2+pas9ZmoIybfyXFfK9fRS4geDclO8BjKzk0GNL8sygCLJZXSebw

BDsPYCxNOr7TpAAHF5Ju2k5QCPvCUVG3GtXBo69klHXsAwrT/7MFRpIW/ZNdlVAR

Yt+0d1ANcgkdkDSIeQ0+B/Id4cr2Oiybc3eExDjOCa13wORDbAZ3BL+cwT3A2Y58

ND2vuV0113hvdtRoyDEmxnoDPkBP0kuA50u1VNSN8tPJHo43q7+uyTpdjtZDpMk5

woL257KR7tlY5xG1XA82n9CxLncJwnHyRMKYHQ6/OqBGOnPIAucm+c/EGwARAQAB

tDdKb2VsIEJlcm5zdGVpbiAoQ09ERSBTSUdOSU5HIEtFWSkgPGpiZXJuc3RlQGFw

YWNoZS5vcmc+iQI3BBMBCgAhBQJY56hSAhsDBQsJCAcDBRUKCQgLBRYCAwEAAh4B

AheAAAoJEKM20MDuZMseLAwQAIlLr3lCjxU9+H8ER1JqwJMuMxVOqf9VAFUMzYZM

EP2NClMl+aROOkA2xtD8rF6ZutPeNcz3mcsZQjsIHsUyqePMGL5NNin2baxIqbCN

0VU9IVpNIXlwiz6AelHUjtGhQ2Qg2nWgZSvwSHZO3+YqJLcmsaDCFxjVQbNOtfta

pc8Lfjwg/+4gK+SJmtdi4+HDQQCNYAgEQhoagtXZulK4XGDvJ68p9y2xUR8JBpcC

PNuQOr8AGGZ3VyoNRa2gGjKj0lC0WkJLB8GmieV7dCjQCdkHQk2qjJlrj4z39M3t

WgAiYDj6BAbbnugWHyTwQYn2mj6PlYoiivYNNq7LO96SLbINJ/hTHT6HZhM2b6WV

zzT6z63gTU2eBWxPzfHAeyKl2/8+MOckPYCXjejni4uB5aFPLV9Zmqtij4fefzy5

gF3zOmJNEMkMjeKQ/I41Gm3vWxaJBKSmG5NO3cvGFWI0o0DEGN+C6W2uqMO+OAE0

WIqloQSlS2bcJczT/CPGlRZheI5gv+3plHMz0Qv0PZE2DhIi+K8dk19Va0YYLwoP

MGN/m2jiRxid1ExuO5bL3wCVXdsXWnJM5c8Sbwp9jWpKwoM

Joel Bernstein
http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 2:40 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:

> Yep, I've got a release candidate uploading now.
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Steve Rowe  wrote:
>
>> Hi Joel,
>>
>> Your Apache LDAP credentials are used for both Subversion and Git, and
>> all Lucene/Solr committers have commit karma on dist.apache.org.
>>
>> From :
>>
>> > The official record for PMC membership is the committee-info.txt file,
>> > and not the LDAP committee group.
>> >
>> > The LDAP committee groups are used to grant access to various resources,
>> > for example the PMC private mailing lists and the SVN dist/release tree.
>> > The LDAP unix groups are also used to grant access to resources, for
>> > example SVN and website publication. Therefore all PMC members (as per
>> > committee-info.txt) should be members of the corresponding LDAP
>> > committee and LDAP unix groups.
>>
>> Although the above implies that only PMC members can commit to the
>> Subversion repo on dist.apache.org, see > a/browse/INFRA-6813>, where ASF Infra granted dist.apache.org commit
>> karma to all Lucene/Solr committers.
>>
>> --
>> Steve
>> www.lucidworks.com
>>
>> > On Apr 7, 2017, at 1:15 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
>> >
>> > I'm building a release candidate locally. Then I'll need to push it to
>> dist.apache.org.
>> >
>> > This is apparently done through SVN. Do I need special credentials to
>> commit to dist.apache.org?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Joel Bernstein
>> > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>> >
>> > On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 11:43 AM, Joel Bernstein 
>> wrote:
>> > Thanks!
>> >
>> > Joel Bernstein
>> > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>> >
>> > On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Adrien Grand 
>> wrote:
>> > I signed your key and uploaded it again.
>> >
>> > Le ven. 7 avr. 2017 à 17:28, Adrien Grand  a écrit :
>> > addVersion should indeed be run on those 3 branches.
>> >
>> > Le ven. 7 avr. 2017 à 17:28, Adrien Grand  a écrit :
>> > OK, let me try to sign it. FYI Ishan is not in the list of recipients
>> of your email.
>> >
>> > Le ven. 7 avr. 2017 à 17:26, Joel Bernstein  a
>> écrit :
>> > The key id is: EE64CB1E
>> >
>> > Ishan, I'll review your personal notes. Thanks!
>> >
>> > I'm currently at the point of running addVersion.py. I believe this is
>> meant to be run on master, 

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Joel Bernstein]

Yep, I've got a release candidate uploading now.

Joel Bernstein
http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Steve Rowe  wrote:

> Hi Joel,
>
> Your Apache LDAP credentials are used for both Subversion and Git, and all
> Lucene/Solr committers have commit karma on dist.apache.org.
>
> From :
>
> > The official record for PMC membership is the committee-info.txt file,
> > and not the LDAP committee group.
> >
> > The LDAP committee groups are used to grant access to various resources,
> > for example the PMC private mailing lists and the SVN dist/release tree.
> > The LDAP unix groups are also used to grant access to resources, for
> > example SVN and website publication. Therefore all PMC members (as per
> > committee-info.txt) should be members of the corresponding LDAP
> > committee and LDAP unix groups.
>
> Although the above implies that only PMC members can commit to the
> Subversion repo on dist.apache.org, see  jira/browse/INFRA-6813>, where ASF Infra granted dist.apache.org commit
> karma to all Lucene/Solr committers.
>
> --
> Steve
> www.lucidworks.com
>
> > On Apr 7, 2017, at 1:15 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
> >
> > I'm building a release candidate locally. Then I'll need to push it to
> dist.apache.org.
> >
> > This is apparently done through SVN. Do I need special credentials to
> commit to dist.apache.org?
> >
> >
> >
> > Joel Bernstein
> > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 11:43 AM, Joel Bernstein 
> wrote:
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Joel Bernstein
> > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
> > I signed your key and uploaded it again.
> >
> > Le ven. 7 avr. 2017 à 17:28, Adrien Grand  a écrit :
> > addVersion should indeed be run on those 3 branches.
> >
> > Le ven. 7 avr. 2017 à 17:28, Adrien Grand  a écrit :
> > OK, let me try to sign it. FYI Ishan is not in the list of recipients of
> your email.
> >
> > Le ven. 7 avr. 2017 à 17:26, Joel Bernstein  a
> écrit :
> > The key id is: EE64CB1E
> >
> > Ishan, I'll review your personal notes. Thanks!
> >
> > I'm currently at the point of running addVersion.py. I believe this is
> meant to be run on master, branch_6x, and branch_6_5.
> >
> > Joel Bernstein
> > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
> > This is correct indeed. What is your key ID?
> >
> > Le ven. 7 avr. 2017 à 17:09, Joel Bernstein  a
> écrit :
> > I've create a key using gpg2 and uploaded it to a public key store. I
> believe this key needs to be signed by another committer in order to sign
> the release. Is this correct?
> >
> > Joel Bernstein
> > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 10:37 AM, Joel Bernstein 
> wrote:
> > The next hurdle I'm working on is the PGP key.
> >
> > Joel Bernstein
> > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 10:26 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
> > Cool! I agree with you the wiki feels a bit prehistoric. :s
> >
> > Le ven. 7 avr. 2017 à 16:24, Joel Bernstein  a
> écrit :
> > Yeah, it's not a great system, but I was able to create the new pages.
> >
> > Joel Bernstein
> > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 10:22 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
> > Does it work now?
> >
> > Le ven. 7 avr. 2017 à 16:05, Joel Bernstein  a
> écrit :
> > Yeah, that must be it. I created an account on lucene-java also. It let
> me copy the page.
> >
> > Joel Bernstein
> > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 10:02 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
> > Maybe this is part of the confusion but the lucene-java and solr wikis
> are different wikis if I remember correctly. You need to have an account
> for each of them.
> >
> > Le ven. 7 avr. 2017 à 16:00, Joel Bernstein  a
> écrit :
> > The wiki seems to have lost the account I just created. Asked for an
> email to be sent for a new password, and nothing has arrived.
> >
> > Joel Bernstein
> > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 9:56 AM, Joel Bernstein 
> wrote:
> > Actually I think it logged me out. Getting logged back in.
> >
> > Joel Bernstein
> > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Joel Bernstein 
> wrote:
> > It wouldn't let me copy https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ReleaseNote621.
> Gave the following message:
> >
> > You are not allowed to copy this page!
> >
> > Joel Bernstein
> > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 9:51 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
> > It should be ok now, can you check? You were 

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Steve Rowe]

Hi Joel,

Your Apache LDAP credentials are used for both Subversion and Git, and all 
Lucene/Solr committers have commit karma on dist.apache.org.

From :

> The official record for PMC membership is the committee-info.txt file,
> and not the LDAP committee group.
>
> The LDAP committee groups are used to grant access to various resources,
> for example the PMC private mailing lists and the SVN dist/release tree.
> The LDAP unix groups are also used to grant access to resources, for
> example SVN and website publication. Therefore all PMC members (as per
> committee-info.txt) should be members of the corresponding LDAP
> committee and LDAP unix groups.

Although the above implies that only PMC members can commit to the Subversion 
repo on dist.apache.org, see 
, where ASF Infra granted 
dist.apache.org commit karma to all Lucene/Solr committers.

-- 
Steve
www.lucidworks.com

> On Apr 7, 2017, at 1:15 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
> 
> I'm building a release candidate locally. Then I'll need to push it to 
> dist.apache.org.
> 
> This is apparently done through SVN. Do I need special credentials to commit 
> to dist.apache.org?
> 
> 
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> 
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 11:43 AM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
> Thanks!
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> 
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
> I signed your key and uploaded it again.
> 
> Le ven. 7 avr. 2017 à 17:28, Adrien Grand  a écrit :
> addVersion should indeed be run on those 3 branches.
> 
> Le ven. 7 avr. 2017 à 17:28, Adrien Grand  a écrit :
> OK, let me try to sign it. FYI Ishan is not in the list of recipients of your 
> email.
> 
> Le ven. 7 avr. 2017 à 17:26, Joel Bernstein  a écrit :
> The key id is: EE64CB1E
> 
> Ishan, I'll review your personal notes. Thanks!
> 
> I'm currently at the point of running addVersion.py. I believe this is meant 
> to be run on master, branch_6x, and branch_6_5. 
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> 
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
> This is correct indeed. What is your key ID?
> 
> Le ven. 7 avr. 2017 à 17:09, Joel Bernstein  a écrit :
> I've create a key using gpg2 and uploaded it to a public key store. I believe 
> this key needs to be signed by another committer in order to sign the 
> release. Is this correct?
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> 
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 10:37 AM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
> The next hurdle I'm working on is the PGP key.
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> 
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 10:26 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
> Cool! I agree with you the wiki feels a bit prehistoric. :s
> 
> Le ven. 7 avr. 2017 à 16:24, Joel Bernstein  a écrit :
> Yeah, it's not a great system, but I was able to create the new pages.
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> 
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 10:22 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
> Does it work now?
> 
> Le ven. 7 avr. 2017 à 16:05, Joel Bernstein  a écrit :
> Yeah, that must be it. I created an account on lucene-java also. It let me 
> copy the page.
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> 
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 10:02 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
> Maybe this is part of the confusion but the lucene-java and solr wikis are 
> different wikis if I remember correctly. You need to have an account for each 
> of them.
> 
> Le ven. 7 avr. 2017 à 16:00, Joel Bernstein  a écrit :
> The wiki seems to have lost the account I just created. Asked for an email to 
> be sent for a new password, and nothing has arrived. 
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> 
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 9:56 AM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
> Actually I think it logged me out. Getting logged back in.
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> 
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
> It wouldn't let me copy https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ReleaseNote621. Gave the 
> following message:
> 
> You are not allowed to copy this page!
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> 
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 9:51 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
> It should be ok now, can you check? You were already in the admin group for 
> the Solr wiki so I did not change anything.
> 
> Le ven. 7 avr. 2017 à 15:36, Joel Bernstein  a écrit :
> My username is JoelBernstein, thanks!
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> 
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 9:32 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
> 
> 

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Ishan Chattopadhyaya]

Joel, I had encountered many issues during the release of 6.4.2, as it was
my first time. Steve helped me out quite a bit.
I have recorded some of my steps at the end of the release guide (
https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ReleaseTodo#Personal_notes). Please
feel free to update the guide and/or link your notes at the end.

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 6:11 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:

> It looks like all the bug fixes are in. I'll start on the release
> candidate this morning. This is my first time as RM, so I may need some
> guidance along the way.
>
> Thanks!
> Joel
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 5:17 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
>
>> Lots of bugs!
>>
>> Joel Bernstein
>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 5:02 PM, Tomás Fernández Löbbe <
>> tomasflo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I'd also like to include SOLR-10425. PointFields ignore indexed="false".
>>> We are working on a fix and some more tests with Hoss. Should be committed
>>> between today and tomorrow
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Steve Rowe  wrote:
>>>
 I’d like to include SOLR-10423.  It’s a bug fix in that Solr
 ShingleFilter queries currently don’t work when sow=false; the patch allows
 for schema configuration that makes them function by disabling
 QueryBuilder’s graph query construction.

 --
 Steve
 www.lucidworks.com

 > On Apr 4, 2017, at 2:29 PM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) <
 cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
 >
 > I'd also like to include fix for https://issues.apache.org/jira
 /browse/SOLR-10421 which should be just four lines of actual fix, plus
 ideally a test for it which will be more than four lines ...
 >
 > - Original Message -
 > From: dev@lucene.apache.org
 > To: dev@lucene.apache.org
 > At: 04/04/17 16:54:50
 >
 > I'd also like to include SOLR-10277 --- it is a serious problem for
 > people running large number of collections. I'll review and commit the
 > patch by tomorrow.
 >
 > On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar
 >  wrote:
 >> I would like to include https://issues.apache.org/jira
 /browse/SOLR-10416
 >>
 >> It is a trivial fix.
 >>
 >> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 11:54 PM, Joel Bernstein 
 wrote:
 >>> SOLR-10404 looks like a nice improvement!
 >>>
 >>> I'll shoot for Friday morning to create the release candidate. I've
 never
 >>> been a release manager before so I may need some guidance along the
 way.
 >>>
 >>>
 >>> Joel Bernstein
 >>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
 >>>
 >>> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 12:21 PM, David Smiley <
 david.w.smi...@gmail.com>
 >>> wrote:
 
  Found & fixed a bug: https://issues.apache.org/jira
 /browse/SOLR-10404  I'd
  like to get this into 6.5.1.  You might be interested in this one
 Joel.
 
  On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 11:58 AM Steve Rowe 
 wrote:
 >
 >
 >> On Apr 3, 2017, at 11:52 AM, Adrien Grand 
 wrote:
 >>
 >> Building the first RC on April 6th sounds good to me! I'm
 wondering
 >> whether the 6.5 Jenkins jobs are still running?
 >
 > I disabled the ASF Jenkins 6.5 jobs shortly after the release.
 FYI you
 > can see which Lucene/Solr jobs are enabled here:
 > .  I’ll re-enable
 the 6.5 jobs
 > now.
 >
 > --
 > Steve
 > www.lucidworks.com
 >
 >
 > 
 -
 > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
 > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
 >
  --
  Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author,
 Speaker
  LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book:
  http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com
 >>>
 >>>
 >>
 >>
 >>
 >> --
 >> Regards,
 >> Shalin Shekhar Mangar.
 >
 >
 >
 > --
 > Regards,
 > Shalin Shekhar Mangar.
 >
 > -
 > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
 > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
 >
 >
 >
 > -
 > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
 > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
 >


 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: 

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Joel Bernstein]

It looks like all the bug fixes are in. I'll start on the release candidate
this morning. This is my first time as RM, so I may need some guidance
along the way.

Thanks!
Joel

Joel Bernstein
http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 5:17 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:

> Lots of bugs!
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 5:02 PM, Tomás Fernández Löbbe <
> tomasflo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'd also like to include SOLR-10425. PointFields ignore indexed="false".
>> We are working on a fix and some more tests with Hoss. Should be committed
>> between today and tomorrow
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Steve Rowe  wrote:
>>
>>> I’d like to include SOLR-10423.  It’s a bug fix in that Solr
>>> ShingleFilter queries currently don’t work when sow=false; the patch allows
>>> for schema configuration that makes them function by disabling
>>> QueryBuilder’s graph query construction.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Steve
>>> www.lucidworks.com
>>>
>>> > On Apr 4, 2017, at 2:29 PM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) <
>>> cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > I'd also like to include fix for https://issues.apache.org/jira
>>> /browse/SOLR-10421 which should be just four lines of actual fix, plus
>>> ideally a test for it which will be more than four lines ...
>>> >
>>> > - Original Message -
>>> > From: dev@lucene.apache.org
>>> > To: dev@lucene.apache.org
>>> > At: 04/04/17 16:54:50
>>> >
>>> > I'd also like to include SOLR-10277 --- it is a serious problem for
>>> > people running large number of collections. I'll review and commit the
>>> > patch by tomorrow.
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar
>>> >  wrote:
>>> >> I would like to include https://issues.apache.org/jira
>>> /browse/SOLR-10416
>>> >>
>>> >> It is a trivial fix.
>>> >>
>>> >> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 11:54 PM, Joel Bernstein 
>>> wrote:
>>> >>> SOLR-10404 looks like a nice improvement!
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I'll shoot for Friday morning to create the release candidate. I've
>>> never
>>> >>> been a release manager before so I may need some guidance along the
>>> way.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Joel Bernstein
>>> >>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 12:21 PM, David Smiley <
>>> david.w.smi...@gmail.com>
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>  Found & fixed a bug: https://issues.apache.org/jira
>>> /browse/SOLR-10404  I'd
>>>  like to get this into 6.5.1.  You might be interested in this one
>>> Joel.
>>> 
>>>  On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 11:58 AM Steve Rowe 
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >> On Apr 3, 2017, at 11:52 AM, Adrien Grand 
>>> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Building the first RC on April 6th sounds good to me! I'm
>>> wondering
>>> >> whether the 6.5 Jenkins jobs are still running?
>>> >
>>> > I disabled the ASF Jenkins 6.5 jobs shortly after the release.
>>> FYI you
>>> > can see which Lucene/Solr jobs are enabled here:
>>> > .  I’ll re-enable the
>>> 6.5 jobs
>>> > now.
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Steve
>>> > www.lucidworks.com
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > 
>>> -
>>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>>> >
>>>  --
>>>  Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
>>>  LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book:
>>>  http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> Regards,
>>> >> Shalin Shekhar Mangar.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Regards,
>>> > Shalin Shekhar Mangar.
>>> >
>>> > -
>>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > -
>>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Joel Bernstein]

Lots of bugs!

Joel Bernstein
http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 5:02 PM, Tomás Fernández Löbbe  wrote:

> I'd also like to include SOLR-10425. PointFields ignore indexed="false".
> We are working on a fix and some more tests with Hoss. Should be committed
> between today and tomorrow
>
> On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Steve Rowe  wrote:
>
>> I’d like to include SOLR-10423.  It’s a bug fix in that Solr
>> ShingleFilter queries currently don’t work when sow=false; the patch allows
>> for schema configuration that makes them function by disabling
>> QueryBuilder’s graph query construction.
>>
>> --
>> Steve
>> www.lucidworks.com
>>
>> > On Apr 4, 2017, at 2:29 PM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) <
>> cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
>> >
>> > I'd also like to include fix for https://issues.apache.org/jira
>> /browse/SOLR-10421 which should be just four lines of actual fix, plus
>> ideally a test for it which will be more than four lines ...
>> >
>> > - Original Message -
>> > From: dev@lucene.apache.org
>> > To: dev@lucene.apache.org
>> > At: 04/04/17 16:54:50
>> >
>> > I'd also like to include SOLR-10277 --- it is a serious problem for
>> > people running large number of collections. I'll review and commit the
>> > patch by tomorrow.
>> >
>> > On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar
>> >  wrote:
>> >> I would like to include https://issues.apache.org/jira
>> /browse/SOLR-10416
>> >>
>> >> It is a trivial fix.
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 11:54 PM, Joel Bernstein 
>> wrote:
>> >>> SOLR-10404 looks like a nice improvement!
>> >>>
>> >>> I'll shoot for Friday morning to create the release candidate. I've
>> never
>> >>> been a release manager before so I may need some guidance along the
>> way.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Joel Bernstein
>> >>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>> >>>
>> >>> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 12:21 PM, David Smiley <
>> david.w.smi...@gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> 
>>  Found & fixed a bug: https://issues.apache.org/jira
>> /browse/SOLR-10404  I'd
>>  like to get this into 6.5.1.  You might be interested in this one
>> Joel.
>> 
>>  On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 11:58 AM Steve Rowe  wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >> On Apr 3, 2017, at 11:52 AM, Adrien Grand 
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Building the first RC on April 6th sounds good to me! I'm wondering
>> >> whether the 6.5 Jenkins jobs are still running?
>> >
>> > I disabled the ASF Jenkins 6.5 jobs shortly after the release.  FYI
>> you
>> > can see which Lucene/Solr jobs are enabled here:
>> > .  I’ll re-enable the
>> 6.5 jobs
>> > now.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Steve
>> > www.lucidworks.com
>> >
>> >
>> > 
>> -
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>> >
>>  --
>>  Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
>>  LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book:
>>  http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Regards,
>> >> Shalin Shekhar Mangar.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Regards,
>> > Shalin Shekhar Mangar.
>> >
>> > -
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > -
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>> >
>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>>
>>
>

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Tomás Fernández Löbbe]

I'd also like to include SOLR-10425. PointFields ignore indexed="false". We
are working on a fix and some more tests with Hoss. Should be committed
between today and tomorrow

On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Steve Rowe  wrote:

> I’d like to include SOLR-10423.  It’s a bug fix in that Solr ShingleFilter
> queries currently don’t work when sow=false; the patch allows for schema
> configuration that makes them function by disabling QueryBuilder’s graph
> query construction.
>
> --
> Steve
> www.lucidworks.com
>
> > On Apr 4, 2017, at 2:29 PM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) <
> cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
> >
> > I'd also like to include fix for https://issues.apache.org/
> jira/browse/SOLR-10421 which should be just four lines of actual fix,
> plus ideally a test for it which will be more than four lines ...
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: dev@lucene.apache.org
> > To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> > At: 04/04/17 16:54:50
> >
> > I'd also like to include SOLR-10277 --- it is a serious problem for
> > people running large number of collections. I'll review and commit the
> > patch by tomorrow.
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar
> >  wrote:
> >> I would like to include https://issues.apache.org/
> jira/browse/SOLR-10416
> >>
> >> It is a trivial fix.
> >>
> >> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 11:54 PM, Joel Bernstein 
> wrote:
> >>> SOLR-10404 looks like a nice improvement!
> >>>
> >>> I'll shoot for Friday morning to create the release candidate. I've
> never
> >>> been a release manager before so I may need some guidance along the
> way.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Joel Bernstein
> >>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 12:21 PM, David Smiley <
> david.w.smi...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> 
>  Found & fixed a bug: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10404
> I'd
>  like to get this into 6.5.1.  You might be interested in this one
> Joel.
> 
>  On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 11:58 AM Steve Rowe  wrote:
> >
> >
> >> On Apr 3, 2017, at 11:52 AM, Adrien Grand 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Building the first RC on April 6th sounds good to me! I'm wondering
> >> whether the 6.5 Jenkins jobs are still running?
> >
> > I disabled the ASF Jenkins 6.5 jobs shortly after the release.  FYI
> you
> > can see which Lucene/Solr jobs are enabled here:
> > .  I’ll re-enable the
> 6.5 jobs
> > now.
> >
> > --
> > Steve
> > www.lucidworks.com
> >
> >
> > 
> -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
> >
>  --
>  Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
>  LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book:
>  http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Regards,
> >> Shalin Shekhar Mangar.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Shalin Shekhar Mangar.
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
> >
> >
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
> >
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>
>

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Steve Rowe]

I’d like to include SOLR-10423.  It’s a bug fix in that Solr ShingleFilter 
queries currently don’t work when sow=false; the patch allows for schema 
configuration that makes them function by disabling QueryBuilder’s graph query 
construction.

--
Steve
www.lucidworks.com

> On Apr 4, 2017, at 2:29 PM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) 
>  wrote:
> 
> I'd also like to include fix for 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10421 which should be just four 
> lines of actual fix, plus ideally a test for it which will be more than four 
> lines ...
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: dev@lucene.apache.org
> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> At: 04/04/17 16:54:50
> 
> I'd also like to include SOLR-10277 --- it is a serious problem for
> people running large number of collections. I'll review and commit the
> patch by tomorrow.
> 
> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar
>  wrote:
>> I would like to include https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10416
>> 
>> It is a trivial fix.
>> 
>> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 11:54 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
>>> SOLR-10404 looks like a nice improvement!
>>> 
>>> I'll shoot for Friday morning to create the release candidate. I've never
>>> been a release manager before so I may need some guidance along the way.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Joel Bernstein
>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 12:21 PM, David Smiley 
>>> wrote:
 
 Found & fixed a bug: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10404  I'd
 like to get this into 6.5.1.  You might be interested in this one Joel.
 
 On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 11:58 AM Steve Rowe  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Apr 3, 2017, at 11:52 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
>> 
>> Building the first RC on April 6th sounds good to me! I'm wondering
>> whether the 6.5 Jenkins jobs are still running?
> 
> I disabled the ASF Jenkins 6.5 jobs shortly after the release.  FYI you
> can see which Lucene/Solr jobs are enabled here:
> .  I’ll re-enable the 6.5 jobs
> now.
> 
> --
> Steve
> www.lucidworks.com
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
> 
 --
 Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
 LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book:
 http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Regards,
>> Shalin Shekhar Mangar.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> Shalin Shekhar Mangar.
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
> 
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
> 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON)]

I'd also like to include fix for 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10421 which should be just four 
lines of actual fix, plus ideally a test for it which will be more than four 
lines ...

- Original Message -
From: dev@lucene.apache.org
To: dev@lucene.apache.org
At: 04/04/17 16:54:50

I'd also like to include SOLR-10277 --- it is a serious problem for
people running large number of collections. I'll review and commit the
patch by tomorrow.

On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar
 wrote:
> I would like to include https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10416
>
> It is a trivial fix.
>
> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 11:54 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
>> SOLR-10404 looks like a nice improvement!
>>
>> I'll shoot for Friday morning to create the release candidate. I've never
>> been a release manager before so I may need some guidance along the way.
>>
>>
>> Joel Bernstein
>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 12:21 PM, David Smiley 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Found & fixed a bug: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10404  I'd
>>> like to get this into 6.5.1.  You might be interested in this one Joel.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 11:58 AM Steve Rowe  wrote:


 > On Apr 3, 2017, at 11:52 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
 >
 > Building the first RC on April 6th sounds good to me! I'm wondering
 > whether the 6.5 Jenkins jobs are still running?

 I disabled the ASF Jenkins 6.5 jobs shortly after the release.  FYI you
 can see which Lucene/Solr jobs are enabled here:
 .  I’ll re-enable the 6.5 jobs
 now.

 --
 Steve
 www.lucidworks.com


 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org

>>> --
>>> Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
>>> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book:
>>> http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Shalin Shekhar Mangar.



-- 
Regards,
Shalin Shekhar Mangar.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Shalin Shekhar Mangar]

I'd also like to include SOLR-10277 --- it is a serious problem for
people running large number of collections. I'll review and commit the
patch by tomorrow.

On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar
 wrote:
> I would like to include https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10416
>
> It is a trivial fix.
>
> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 11:54 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
>> SOLR-10404 looks like a nice improvement!
>>
>> I'll shoot for Friday morning to create the release candidate. I've never
>> been a release manager before so I may need some guidance along the way.
>>
>>
>> Joel Bernstein
>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 12:21 PM, David Smiley 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Found & fixed a bug: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10404  I'd
>>> like to get this into 6.5.1.  You might be interested in this one Joel.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 11:58 AM Steve Rowe  wrote:


 > On Apr 3, 2017, at 11:52 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
 >
 > Building the first RC on April 6th sounds good to me! I'm wondering
 > whether the 6.5 Jenkins jobs are still running?

 I disabled the ASF Jenkins 6.5 jobs shortly after the release.  FYI you
 can see which Lucene/Solr jobs are enabled here:
 .  I’ll re-enable the 6.5 jobs
 now.

 --
 Steve
 www.lucidworks.com


 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org

>>> --
>>> Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
>>> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book:
>>> http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Shalin Shekhar Mangar.



-- 
Regards,
Shalin Shekhar Mangar.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Shalin Shekhar Mangar]

I would like to include https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10416

It is a trivial fix.

On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 11:54 PM, Joel Bernstein  wrote:
> SOLR-10404 looks like a nice improvement!
>
> I'll shoot for Friday morning to create the release candidate. I've never
> been a release manager before so I may need some guidance along the way.
>
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 12:21 PM, David Smiley 
> wrote:
>>
>> Found & fixed a bug: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10404  I'd
>> like to get this into 6.5.1.  You might be interested in this one Joel.
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 11:58 AM Steve Rowe  wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> > On Apr 3, 2017, at 11:52 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Building the first RC on April 6th sounds good to me! I'm wondering
>>> > whether the 6.5 Jenkins jobs are still running?
>>>
>>> I disabled the ASF Jenkins 6.5 jobs shortly after the release.  FYI you
>>> can see which Lucene/Solr jobs are enabled here:
>>> .  I’ll re-enable the 6.5 jobs
>>> now.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Steve
>>> www.lucidworks.com
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>>>
>> --
>> Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
>> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book:
>> http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com
>
>



-- 
Regards,
Shalin Shekhar Mangar.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Joel Bernstein]

SOLR-10404 looks like a nice improvement!

I'll shoot for Friday morning to create the release candidate. I've never
been a release manager before so I may need some guidance along the way.


Joel Bernstein
http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 12:21 PM, David Smiley 
wrote:

> Found & fixed a bug: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10404
> I'd like to get this into 6.5.1.  You might be interested in this one Joel.
>
> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 11:58 AM Steve Rowe  wrote:
>
>>
>> > On Apr 3, 2017, at 11:52 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
>> >
>> > Building the first RC on April 6th sounds good to me! I'm wondering
>> whether the 6.5 Jenkins jobs are still running?
>>
>> I disabled the ASF Jenkins 6.5 jobs shortly after the release.  FYI you
>> can see which Lucene/Solr jobs are enabled here: <
>> https://builds.apache.org/computer/lucene/>.  I’ll re-enable the 6.5
>> jobs now.
>>
>> --
>> Steve
>> www.lucidworks.com
>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>>
>> --
> Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book:
> http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com
>

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[David Smiley]

Found & fixed a bug: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10404  I'd
like to get this into 6.5.1.  You might be interested in this one Joel.

On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 11:58 AM Steve Rowe  wrote:

>
> > On Apr 3, 2017, at 11:52 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
> >
> > Building the first RC on April 6th sounds good to me! I'm wondering
> whether the 6.5 Jenkins jobs are still running?
>
> I disabled the ASF Jenkins 6.5 jobs shortly after the release.  FYI you
> can see which Lucene/Solr jobs are enabled here: <
> https://builds.apache.org/computer/lucene/>.  I’ll re-enable the 6.5 jobs
> now.
>
> --
> Steve
> www.lucidworks.com
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>
> --
Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book:
http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Steve Rowe]

> On Apr 3, 2017, at 11:52 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
> 
> Building the first RC on April 6th sounds good to me! I'm wondering whether 
> the 6.5 Jenkins jobs are still running?

I disabled the ASF Jenkins 6.5 jobs shortly after the release.  FYI you can see 
which Lucene/Solr jobs are enabled here: 
.  I’ll re-enable the 6.5 jobs now.

--
Steve
www.lucidworks.com


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Adrien Grand]

I just merged LUCENE-7749. Building the first RC on April 6th sounds good
to me! I'm wondering whether the 6.5 Jenkins jobs are still running?

Le lun. 3 avr. 2017 à 14:09, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> a écrit :

Ok, so it sounds like we've got some open issues to resolve. How does
Thursday April 6th work for starting the release process?

Joel Bernstein
http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 12:35 PM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) <
cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:

I'd like to include https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10383 too
(on Monday) if there are no objections or concerns.

From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 03/31/17 15:08:12
To: Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON), dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: 6.5.1 release?

Joel, I'd like to include https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7749
too if that works for you.

Le jeu. 30 mars 2017 à 16:38, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) <
cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> a écrit :

Correct, release 6.5.1 will be off branch_6_5 branch and there will be a
6.5.1 tag (but not branch) e.g. for the 6.4.2 release we have tag
https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/tree/releases/lucene-solr/6.4.2

branch_6_6 will (in future) be branched off the branch_6x branch.

branch_7x will (in future) be branched off master branch.

That's my understanding anyhow and I'm slightly tempted to draw this as a
diagram similar to what "git log --decorate --oneline --graph" outputs ...

Regards,
Christine

- Original Message -
From: dev@lucene.apache.org
To: dev@lucene.apache.org
At: 03/30/17 15:29:15

That's done off the 6.5 branch right? I am committing soon a redone
DIH example and only want it in trunk and 6.6 as the change is quite
large.

Regards,
   Alex.

http://www.solr-start.com/ - Resources for Solr users, new and experienced


On 30 March 2017 at 06:19, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to have a 6.5.1 release due to
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10341.
>
> The fix for this is committed and back ported. I'm traveling this week.
But
> can be the release manager for this next week.
>
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Joel Bernstein]

Ok, so it sounds like we've got some open issues to resolve. How does
Thursday April 6th work for starting the release process?

Joel Bernstein
http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 12:35 PM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) <
cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:

> I'd like to include https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10383 too
> (on Monday) if there are no objections or concerns.
>
> From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 03/31/17 15:08:12
> To: Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON), dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: 6.5.1 release?
>
> Joel, I'd like to include https://issues.apache.org/
> jira/browse/LUCENE-7749 too if that works for you.
>
> Le jeu. 30 mars 2017 à 16:38, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) <
> cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> a écrit :
>
>> Correct, release 6.5.1 will be off branch_6_5 branch and there will be a
>> 6.5.1 tag (but not branch) e.g. for the 6.4.2 release we have tag
>> https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/tree/releases/lucene-solr/6.4.2
>>
>> branch_6_6 will (in future) be branched off the branch_6x branch.
>>
>> branch_7x will (in future) be branched off master branch.
>>
>> That's my understanding anyhow and I'm slightly tempted to draw this as a
>> diagram similar to what "git log --decorate --oneline --graph" outputs ...
>>
>> Regards,
>> Christine
>>
>> - Original Message -
>> From: dev@lucene.apache.org
>> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
>> At: 03/30/17 15:29:15
>>
>> That's done off the 6.5 branch right? I am committing soon a redone
>> DIH example and only want it in trunk and 6.6 as the change is quite
>> large.
>>
>> Regards,
>>Alex.
>> ----
>> http://www.solr-start.com/ - Resources for Solr users, new and
>> experienced
>>
>>
>> On 30 March 2017 at 06:19, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I would like to have a 6.5.1 release due to
>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10341.
>> >
>> > The fix for this is committed and back ported. I'm traveling this week.
>> But
>> > can be the release manager for this next week.
>> >
>> >
>> > Joel Bernstein
>> > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>>
>>
>>

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON)]

I'd like to include https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10383 too (on 
Monday) if there are no objections or concerns.

From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 03/31/17 15:08:12
To: Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON), dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: 6.5.1 release?

Joel, I'd like to include https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7749 too 
if that works for you.

Le jeu. 30 mars 2017 à 16:38, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) 
<cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> a écrit :

Correct, release 6.5.1 will be off branch_6_5 branch and there will be a 6.5.1 
tag (but not branch) e.g. for the 6.4.2 release we have tag 
https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/tree/releases/lucene-solr/6.4.2

branch_6_6 will (in future) be branched off the branch_6x branch.

branch_7x will (in future) be branched off master branch.

That's my understanding anyhow and I'm slightly tempted to draw this as a 
diagram similar to what "git log --decorate --oneline --graph" outputs ...

Regards,
Christine

- Original Message -
From: dev@lucene.apache.org
To: dev@lucene.apache.org
At: 03/30/17 15:29:15

That's done off the 6.5 branch right? I am committing soon a redone
DIH example and only want it in trunk and 6.6 as the change is quite
large.

Regards,
   Alex.

http://www.solr-start.com/ - Resources for Solr users, new and experienced


On 30 March 2017 at 06:19, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to have a 6.5.1 release due to
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10341.
>
> The fix for this is committed and back ported. I'm traveling this week. But
> can be the release manager for this next week.
>
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Adrien Grand]

Joel, I'd like to include https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7749
too if that works for you.

Le jeu. 30 mars 2017 à 16:38, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) <
cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> a écrit :

> Correct, release 6.5.1 will be off branch_6_5 branch and there will be a
> 6.5.1 tag (but not branch) e.g. for the 6.4.2 release we have tag
> https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/tree/releases/lucene-solr/6.4.2
>
> branch_6_6 will (in future) be branched off the branch_6x branch.
>
> branch_7x will (in future) be branched off master branch.
>
> That's my understanding anyhow and I'm slightly tempted to draw this as a
> diagram similar to what "git log --decorate --oneline --graph" outputs ...
>
> Regards,
> Christine
>
> - Original Message -
> From: dev@lucene.apache.org
> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> At: 03/30/17 15:29:15
>
> That's done off the 6.5 branch right? I am committing soon a redone
> DIH example and only want it in trunk and 6.6 as the change is quite
> large.
>
> Regards,
>Alex.
> 
> http://www.solr-start.com/ - Resources for Solr users, new and experienced
>
>
> On 30 March 2017 at 06:19, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I would like to have a 6.5.1 release due to
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10341.
> >
> > The fix for this is committed and back ported. I'm traveling this week.
> But
> > can be the release manager for this next week.
> >
> >
> > Joel Bernstein
> > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>
>
>

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON)]

Correct, release 6.5.1 will be off branch_6_5 branch and there will be a 6.5.1 
tag (but not branch) e.g. for the 6.4.2 release we have tag 
https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/tree/releases/lucene-solr/6.4.2

branch_6_6 will (in future) be branched off the branch_6x branch.

branch_7x will (in future) be branched off master branch.

That's my understanding anyhow and I'm slightly tempted to draw this as a 
diagram similar to what "git log --decorate --oneline --graph" outputs ...

Regards,
Christine

- Original Message -
From: dev@lucene.apache.org
To: dev@lucene.apache.org
At: 03/30/17 15:29:15

That's done off the 6.5 branch right? I am committing soon a redone
DIH example and only want it in trunk and 6.6 as the change is quite
large.

Regards,
   Alex.

http://www.solr-start.com/ - Resources for Solr users, new and experienced


On 30 March 2017 at 06:19, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to have a 6.5.1 release due to
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10341.
>
> The fix for this is committed and back ported. I'm traveling this week. But
> can be the release manager for this next week.
>
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Alexandre Rafalovitch]

That's done off the 6.5 branch right? I am committing soon a redone
DIH example and only want it in trunk and 6.6 as the change is quite
large.

Regards,
   Alex.

http://www.solr-start.com/ - Resources for Solr users, new and experienced


On 30 March 2017 at 06:19, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to have a 6.5.1 release due to
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10341.
>
> The fix for this is committed and back ported. I'm traveling this week. But
> can be the release manager for this next week.
>
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Joel Bernstein]

Sounds good.

Joel Bernstein
http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 1:12 PM, Adrien Grand <jpou...@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1
>
> I'll include https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7755 as well if
> it works for you.
>
> Le jeu. 30 mars 2017 à 12:19, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> a
> écrit :
>
> Hi,
>
> I would like to have a 6.5.1 release due to https://issues.apache.org/
> jira/browse/SOLR-10341.
>
> The fix for this is committed and back ported. I'm traveling this week.
> But can be the release manager for this next week.
>
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
>

Re: 6.5.1 release?

[Adrien Grand]

+1

I'll include https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7755 as well if
it works for you.

Le jeu. 30 mars 2017 à 12:19, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> a écrit :

Hi,

I would like to have a 6.5.1 release due to
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10341.

The fix for this is committed and back ported. I'm traveling this week. But
can be the release manager for this next week.


Joel Bernstein
http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

6.5.1 release?

[Joel Bernstein]

Hi,

I would like to have a 6.5.1 release due to
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10341.

The fix for this is committed and back ported. I'm traveling this week. But
can be the release manager for this next week.


Joel Bernstein
http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/