Re: svn commit: r1682031 [1/2] - in /lucene/dev/branches/branch_5x: ./ solr/ solr/core/ solr/core/src/java/org/apache/solr/ solr/core/src/java/org/apache/solr/cloud/ solr/core/src/java/org/apache/solr

Java7 compilation borked?: [javac] Compiling 807 source files to /var/lib/jenkins/jobs/Solr-core-tests-5x-Java7/workspace/solr/build/solr-core/classes/java [javac] /var/lib/jenkins/jobs/Solr-core-tests-5x-Java7/workspace/solr/core/src/java/org/apache/solr/logging/MDCLoggingContext.java:26:

Re: Hmm, bug (schemaless/schema api)?

> On May 27, 2015, at 1:40 PM, Gus Heck wrote: > > What you say is what I had generally understood to be the case in the past > with regular static schemas, but I had hoped something newer and more > flexible was implied with the advent of an API, and the "schemaless" > configuration. Althoug

Re: [VOTE] 5.2.0 RC1

I got an error running the smoke tester with the provided cmdline - if I add a trailing slash to the URL the script gets past this error though: —— Test Lucene... test basics... Retrying download of url https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene/ after exception: HTTP Error 404: Not

Re: [VOTE] 5.2.0 RC1

> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-solr-5.2.0-RC1-rev1682085/ > > On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 1:59 PM, Steve Rowe wrote: > I got an error running the smoke tester with the provided cmdline - if I add > a trailing slash to the URL the script gets past this error

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-5.x-Linux (64bit/jdk1.8.0_45) - Build # 12644 - Failure!

one to four. Steve [1] HDD: <http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822178338> > Mike McCandless > > http://blog.mikemccandless.com > > > On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Steve Rowe wrote: >> SSD: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820167299 &

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-5.x-Linux (64bit/jdk1.8.0_45) - Build # 12644 - Failure!

gt; under solr, running at once? >> >> Mike McCandless >> >> http://blog.mikemccandless.com >> >> >> On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Steve Rowe wrote: >>> SSD: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820167299 >>> CPU: htt

Re: [VOTE] 5.2.0 RC2

+1 SUCCESS! [0:22:46.736047] I first downloaded via Subversion (took ~9 min), then pointed the smoke tester at the checkout: cd /tmp svn co https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-solr-5.2.0-RC2-rev1682356 cd ~/svn/lucene/dev/branches/lucene_solr_5_2 python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/s

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-5.x-Linux (32bit/ibm-j9-jdk7) - Build # 12700 - Failure!

Uwe: Error: JAVA_HOME is not defined correctly. We cannot execute /var/lib/jenkins/tools/java/32bit/ibm-j9-jdk7/bin/java > On May 29, 2015, at 9:09 PM, Policeman Jenkins Server > wrote: > > Build: http://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-Solr-5.x-Linux/12700/ > Java: 32bit/ibm-j9-jdk7 > -Xjit:

Re: [VOTE] 5.2.0 RC3

+1 SUCCESS! [0:22:21.631757] Steve On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Anshum Gupta wrote: > Please vote for the third release candidate for Apache Lucene/Solr 5.2.0. > > The artifacts can be downloaded from: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-solr-5.2.0-RC3-rev1682753 > >

Re: [jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-6514) 'ant idea' no longer includes code style settings

for IntelliJ v14+ >> (merged trunk r1682948) >> >>> 'ant idea' no longer includes code style settings >>> - >>> >>>Key: LUCENE-6514 >>>URL: https://is

Re: [VOTE] 5.2.0 RC4

+1 SUCCESS! [0:21:52.916261] Steve On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 11:12 PM, Anshum Gupta wrote: > Please vote for the fourth (and hopefully final) release candidate for > Apache Lucene/Solr 5.2.0. > > The artifacts can be downloaded from: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-solr-5

Re: VOTE: RC0 release apache-solr-ref-guide-5.2.pdf

+1 Steve > On Jun 3, 2015, at 1:30 PM, Chris Hostetter wrote: > > > Please VOTE to release these files as the Solr Ref Guide 5.2... > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/solr/ref-guide/apache-solr-ref-guide-5.2-RC0/ > > > NOTE: this vote will be open for a minimum of 72 hours, b

ASF & Policeman Jenkins jobs disabled [was: Re: [JENKINS] Solr-Artifacts-5.2 - Build # 13 - Still Failing]

ASF Infrastructure wrote in an email to committ...@apache.org that Subversion will be down for as much as 6 hours from 22:00 UTC. I temporarily took all three Policeman Jenkins nodes offline. I apparently don’t have such permission on ASF Jenkins, so I instead manually disabled all 19 jobs. I’

Re: ASF & Policeman Jenkins jobs disabled [was: Re: [JENKINS] Solr-Artifacts-5.2 - Build # 13 - Still Failing]

Hipchat, I created a JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-9775 Steve > On Jun 5, 2015, at 7:37 PM, Steve Rowe wrote: > > ASF Infrastructure wrote in an email to committ...@apache.org that Subversion > will be down for as much as 6 hours from 22:00 UTC. > > I te

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-trunk-Linux (32bit/jdk1.8.0_60-ea-b06) - Build # 12086 - Still Failing!

Test bug - I committed a fix. - Steve > On Mar 25, 2015, at 10:17 AM, Policeman Jenkins Server > wrote: > > Build: http://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-Solr-trunk-Linux/12086/ > Java: 32bit/jdk1.8.0_60-ea-b06 -server -XX:+UseG1GC > > 1 tests failed. > FAILED: org.apache.solr.rest.schema.Test

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-trunk-Linux (32bit/jdk1.9.0-ea-b54) - Build # 12085 - Still Failing!

Thanks Alan, I committed a fix. - Steve > On Mar 25, 2015, at 9:01 AM, Alan Woodward wrote: > > This is a bug in the test (there's an extra "field" in an error message). > I'll fix in a bit if nobody else gets there first... > > Alan Woodward > www.flax.co.uk > > > On 25 Mar 2015, at 15:32,

Re: jhighlight-1.0 contains LGPL-only files

+1 to remove. > On Mar 26, 2015, at 4:43 AM, Shai Erera wrote: > > Looks like 5.1 release process will start soon - should we remove this .jar > before the release? I see there's some progress on TIKA-1581, but it doesn't > look like it's going to be resolved that soon. > > Shai > > On Fri,

Re: [JENKINS-MAVEN] Lucene-Solr-Maven-trunk #1370: POMs out of sync

common.compile-test: [mkdir] Created dir: /usr/home/jenkins/jenkins-slave/workspace/Lucene-Solr-Maven-trunk/solr/build/solr-core/classes/test [javac] Compiling 517 source files to /usr/home/jenkins/jenkins-slave/workspace/Lucene-Solr-Maven-trunk/solr/build/solr-core/classes/test [java

Re: svn commit: r1666073 - in /lucene/board-reports/2015: ./ board-report-march.txt

Hi Mark, On Wednesday, March 11, 2015, wrote: > +## Releases: > + > + - 5.0 was released on Fri Feb 20 2015 > + - 4.10.3 was released on Mon Dec 29 2014 4.10.4 is missing - maybe its metadata is missing from a doap file or something? > + PyLucene > + [...] > + > +No releases where

Re: Changes to the Solr website - what kind of review process is required?

Shawn, +1 to your changes. Filing a JIRA can't hurt, but for small changes like this, I think committers should feel free to just commit. Steve On Monday, March 16, 2015, Shawn Heisey wrote: > I have some changes I'd like to make to the Solr website, but I'm not > entirely sure what kind of r

Re: Building release version from source (without -SNAPSHOT suffix)

Hi Alex, See item 3.c. at : ant -Dversion=X.Y.Z prepare-release Steve > On Mar 17, 2015, at 5:17 PM, Alexandre Rafalovitch wrote: > > Hi, > > A tiny question, but I want to get it right. Right now I build the

Re: Solr 5.0: Post-release changed were not pushed live

Hi Alex, Here’s the SVN link: http://svn.apache.org/r1661785 - the github link is usable to checkout the whole branch at that revision using Subversion. The 5.0 release was cut from r1659987 (earlier than the revision for the changes under discussion), and the release vote includes vetting the

Re: Building release version from source (without -SNAPSHOT suffix)

I don’t think it’s useful to have release manager instructions on the page for new contributors. I’m curious why you think so? Steve > On Mar 17, 2015, at 6:34 PM, Alexandre Rafalovitch wrote: > > Thank you Steve and Shawn. > > For my purposes, "ant -Dversion=X.Y.Z prepare-release" was a bit

Re: Policeman Jenkins Harware upgrade successful

+1, many thanks Uwe. Good news on the ASF Jenkins front: Chris Lambertus has created a new Ubuntu VM for Lucene to use as a Jenkins slave (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-9096), so we should be able to escape from the FreeBSD constraints of our current slave in short order. Uwe: Ch

Re: VOTE: Solr Ref Guide for 6.2, RC1

+1 -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Sep 8, 2016, at 11:34 AM, Cassandra Targett wrote: > > After a respin, please VOTE to release the Apache Solr Reference Guide for > 6.2. > > The artifacts are available at: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/solr/ref-guide/apache-solr-ref-guid

Re: Erroneous tokenization behavior

Hi Sattam, You’re right, StandardTokenizer's behavior changed (in 4.9.1/4.10) to split long tokens at maxTokenLength rather than ignore tokens longer than maxTokenLength. You can simulate the old behavior by setting maxTokenLength to the length of the longest token you want to be able to ignor

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 6.2.1 RC1

+1 Docs, javadocs and changes look good, and the smoke tester passed for me. (I closed the console before I could copy the timing, but I promise you, it was unbelievably fast - believe me, it’s true.) -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Sep 16, 2016, at 9:25 AM, Michael McCandless > wrote: >

Re: [JENKINS-EA] Lucene-Solr-master-Linux (32bit/jdk-9-ea+168) - Build # 19648 - Still Failing!

None of these reproduce for me using Java8. -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On May 19, 2017, at 6:38 PM, Policeman Jenkins Server > wrote: > > Build: https://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-Solr-master-Linux/19648/ > Java: 32bit/jdk-9-ea+168 -client -XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC > > 7 tests failed. >

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 6.6.0 RC3

+1 Lucene docs, changes and javadocs look good, and the smoke tester said: SUCCESS! [0:28:46.141845] -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On May 26, 2017, at 4:54 AM, Martijn v Groningen > wrote: > > +1 > > SUCCESS! [0:48:26.225331] > > On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 9:43 AM Ishan Chattopadhyaya > wr

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 6.6.0 RC3

Ishan, If there is a respin, I’d like to include SOLR-10758 (updates Chinese analysis in the Solr ref guide, and includes a Lucene test addition in the analysis/icu module). -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On May 26, 2017, at 12:45 PM, Ishan Chattopadhyaya > wrote: > > Not sure if half of Win

Re: [JENKINS] Solr-reference-guide-6.x - Build # 16 - Failure

I pushed a fix. "ant build-site build-pdf” from solr/solr-ref-guide/ succeeds for me now. (Forgot to do that previously for the included sanity checks.) -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On May 26, 2017, at 4:41 PM, Apache Jenkins Server > wrote: > > Build: https://builds.apache.org/job/Solr-re

Re: Issue with 6.5.1 RC2

Hi Joel, Not sure why this is suddenly an issue - I guess “SNI” has been enabled on archive.apache.org? Some useful info here (about a “requests” lib, AFAICT an alternative to urllib):

Re: Issue with 6.5.1 RC2

t verification. I wasn't sure if cert verification > > was something that was integral to the process. > > > > Joel Bernstein > > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ > > > > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Steve Rowe wrote: > >> > >> Hi J

Re: Issue with 6.5.1 RC2

opefully the changes will do the > trick after they've been pushed. > > Joel Bernstein > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ > > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Steve Rowe wrote: > Yeah, that is a sucky part of this: you want to make modifications on the > release branch,

Re: Issue with 6.5.1 RC2

t; > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 7:11 PM, Steve Rowe wrote: > Joel, > > I know you’re in-process with RC2, but if you have to restart for some > reason, I’d like to include SOLR-10527. > > -- > Steve > www.lucidworks.com > > > On Apr 19, 2017, at 6:57 PM, Joel B

Re: Issue with 6.5.1 RC2

Done. -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Apr 19, 2017, at 7:49 PM, Steve Rowe wrote: > > Woohoo! Thanks Joel. Running all tests on branch_6_5 now. > > -- > Steve > www.lucidworks.com > >> On Apr 19, 2017, at 7:20 PM, Joel Bernstein wrote: >> >> I&

Re: Issue with 6.5.1 RC2

Crap, Jenkins found an unused import in my commit on branch_6_5 :(. I forgot to run precommit. Doing so now. -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Apr 19, 2017, at 8:07 PM, Steve Rowe wrote: > > Done. > > -- > Steve > www.lucidworks.com > >> On Apr 19, 2017,

Re: Issue with 6.5.1 RC2

The unused import was the only problem; I’ve removed it on branch_6_5. Sorry, hope I didn’t cause a delay in the release process. -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Apr 20, 2017, at 8:57 AM, Steve Rowe wrote: > > Crap, Jenkins found an unused import in my commit on branch_6_5 :(.

Re: Issue with 6.5.1 RC2

I guess precommit is only run as part of the smoke tester. > On Apr 20, 2017, at 9:20 AM, Joel Bernstein wrote: > > Interesting the entire release process completed without complaining. > > Joel Bernstein > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ > > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 9:

Re: Issue with 6.5.1 RC2

precommit, -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Apr 20, 2017, at 9:29 AM, Joel Bernstein wrote: > > Smoke testes passed as well > > > Joel Bernstein > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ > > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 9:21 AM, Steve Rowe wrote: > I guess precommit is only run as

Re: Issue with 6.5.1 RC2

Also, I think buildAndPushRelease.py should invoke “precommit" too, (near) where it runs 'ant clean test'. -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Apr 20, 2017, at 9:51 AM, Steve Rowe wrote: > > That’s bizarre. > > The smoke tester runs ‘ant validate’, which does *

Re: Issue with 6.5.1 RC2

iminating > some of the overlap? > > Since the smokeTesters is run by those voting on the release maybe this > should be the heavier of the two. > > Joel Bernstein > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ > > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Steve Rowe wrote: > Also, I thi

Re: Issue with 6.5.1 RC2

> Joel Bernstein > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ > > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Steve Rowe wrote: > I was thinking that if buildAndPushRelease.py can identify problems early, > the RM won’t have to later redo work when a problem is found, e.g. by the > smoke tester.

Re: Issue with 6.5.1 RC2

> > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 12:50 PM, Steve Rowe wrote: > I’ll take a look. > > -- > Steve > www.lucidworks.com > > > On Apr 20, 2017, at 12:46 PM, Joel Bernstein wrote: > > > > I've uploaded the RC2 here > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist

Re: Issue with 6.5.1 RC2

smokeTestRelease.py? And what version of Python are you using? -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Apr 20, 2017, at 1:01 PM, Steve Rowe wrote: > > I have Python 3.4.2 on my Linux box, and apparently 3.4.3 is the first that > supports the changes you made, so the smoke tester is fa

Re: Issue with 6.5.1 RC2

urllib/request.py", > line 1320, in do_open > > raise URLError(err) > > urllib.error.URLError: certificate verify failed (_ssl.c:749)> > > > > Perhaps the error was only local to my machine. But I didn't have this error > when building RC1 > >

Re: Issue with 6.5.1 RC2

File > "/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/3.6/lib/python3.6/ssl.py", > line 1061, in do_handshake > > self._sslobj.do_handshake() > > File > "/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/3.6/lib/python3.6/ssl.py", > line 683, in d

Re: Issue with 6.5.1 RC2

t.com/ > > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 1:47 PM, Steve Rowe wrote: > AFAICT that error occurs very early in the smoke test process, with the first > attempt to download the directory listing at the release URL. I’m running > the reverted-SSL-changes smokeTestRelease.py on both Python 3.4.

Re: Issue with 6.5.1 RC2

to the platform or just something odd with python 3.6.1 > > > > Joel Bernstein > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ > > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Steve Rowe wrote: > FYI I got SUCCESS! [0:36:33.390707] from my reverted-SSL-changes > smokeTestRelease.py on Py

Re: Issue with 6.5.1 RC2

> > Joel Bernstein > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ > > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Steve Rowe wrote: > FYI I got SUCCESS! [0:36:33.390707] from my reverted-SSL-changes > smokeTestRelease.py on Python 3.4.2 against the 6.5.1RC2 URL. (macOS/Python > 3.5.1 reverted smoke

Re: Issue with 6.5.1 RC2

20, 2017, at 10:29 AM, Steve Rowe wrote: > > I was thinking that if buildAndPushRelease.py can identify problems early, > the RM won’t have to later redo work when a problem is found, e.g. by the > smoke tester. IMHO the extra 10 minutes (on my laptop anyway) from > auto-runni

Re: 6.5.1 release?

anch *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 > w

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 6.5.1 RC2

+1 Lucene docs, changes and javadocs look good, and the smoke tester is happy: SUCCESS! [0:30:36.220143] -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Apr 21, 2017, at 9:45 AM, jim ferenczi wrote: > > Please vote for release candidate 2 for Lucene/Solr 6.5.1 > > The artifacts can be downloaded from: > ht

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 6.5.1 RC2

Andrzej and Yonik, did you vote for the RC2 at commit 7477dcd? That was superseded by a later “RC2" at cd1f23c. We really should not re-use RC numbers. -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Apr 24, 2017, at 10:48 AM, Yonik Seeley wrote: > > +1 > > -Yonik > > > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 10:31 PM,

Re: what's up with https://builds.apache.org/computer/lucene/ ?

Looks like jobs are not getting put on the queue, so the lucene node goes to sleep. Not sure why jobs’ schedules aren’t being respected, e.g. the non-nightly test jobs are scheduled to build @hourly. I clicked the button to start the agent on the lucene node, then manually kicked off the “Luce

Re: what's up with https://builds.apache.org/computer/lucene/ ?

Lucene/Solr jobs: <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14004>. -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Apr 25, 2017, at 10:00 AM, Steve Rowe wrote: > > Looks like jobs are not getting put on the queue, so the lucene node goes to > sleep. > > Not sure why jobs

Re: what's up with https://builds.apache.org/computer/lucene/ ?

They asked me to create a JIRA for the job scheduling glitch: <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14007>. -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Apr 25, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Steve Rowe wrote: > > Infra has rebooted the lucene node, no luck. Jobs are still not getting > en

Re: what's up with https://builds.apache.org/computer/lucene/ ?

JDK 1.8 (latest) > > Email was triggered for > : Failure - Any > Sending email for trigger: Failure - Any > ERROR: lucene is offline; cannot locate JDK 1.8 (latest) > > ERROR: lucene is offline; cannot locate JDK 1.8 (latest) > ERROR: lucene is offline; cannot locate JDK 1.8 (lat

Re: what's up with https://builds.apache.org/computer/lucene/ ?

e system is restarted, the jobs will start up again. -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Apr 25, 2017, at 1:39 PM, Steve Rowe wrote: > > Mikhail, > > I manually started that job, and then Infra’s Daniel Takamori rebooted the > node, interrupting execution of the job. > > -- &g

Re: what's up with https://builds.apache.org/computer/lucene/ ?

Not sure what the problem(s) was/were (no commentary on INFRA-14007) but it looks like things are back to normal: as of roughly an hour ago, lots of jobs are enqueued, and one is running. -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Apr 25, 2017, at 2:58 PM, Steve Rowe wrote: > > ASF Infr

More ASF Jenkins job triggering problems

Mikhail alerted me to the fact that the Lucene-Artifacts-6.x job hasn’t run recently on ASF Jenkins. This job is a “downstream project” of Lucene-Solr-NightlyTests-6.x, i.e. once the latter has finished building, the former is triggered. (Solr-Artifacts-6.x is a downstream project of Lucene-A

Re: [JENKINS-MAVEN] Lucene-Solr-Maven-master #1954: POMs out of sync

Looks like there are disk space problems. I logged into lucene1-us-west.apache.org and ran ‘df -k /‘: - $ df -k / Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on /dev/mapper/lucene1--us--west--vg-root 30582652 30566212 0 100% / - Also from th

Re: [JENKINS-MAVEN] Lucene-Solr-Maven-master #1954: POMs out of sync

I mentioned the issue on Infra hipchat channel, and pono looked and then wrote: > cleared 9gb in /var/cache/apt/ He also mentioned he’d look further for other culprits, but at least for now things should be okay. -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Feb 10, 2017, at 1:14 PM, Steve Rowe

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 5.5.4 RC1

+1 Changes, docs and javadocs look good, and the smoke tester was happy (with --test-java8): SUCCESS! [0:41:56.360623] -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Feb 8, 2017, at 3:28 PM, Adrien Grand wrote: > > Le jeu. 9 févr. 2017 à 00:26, Adrien Grand a écrit : > Please vote for release candidate 1

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-Tests-5.5 - Build # 20 - Failure

These two failures reproduce for me on branch_5_5, but not on master or branch_6x. -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Feb 11, 2017, at 2:04 AM, Apache Jenkins Server > wrote: > > Build: https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-Solr-Tests-5.5/20/ > > 2 tests failed. > FAILED: > org.apache.lucene.

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-SmokeRelease-5.5 - Build # 12 - Still Failing

This is weird - the JDK for this job is set to “JDK 1.7 (latest)”, and previous runs have not had this issue. -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Feb 12, 2017, at 1:25 AM, Apache Jenkins Server > wrote: > > Build: https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-Solr-SmokeRelease-5.5/12/ > > No tests ran.

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-SmokeRelease-5.5 - Build # 12 - Still Failing

version b142 is still available as are early access > releases (non jigsaw) of b128, b132, b139 > > All this information is updated on :- > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INFRA/JDK+Installation+Matrix > > Enjoy > > Gav… -- Steve www.lucidworks.com >

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 5.5.4 RC1

e www.lucidworks.com > On Feb 13, 2017, at 4:10 AM, Adrien Grand wrote: > > I would appreciate if someone could confirm that failures from > https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-Solr-SmokeRelease-5.5/13/ are not > release blockers. > > Le sam. 11 févr. 2017 à 06:31, Stev

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-Tests-5.5 - Build # 26 - Still Failing

This failure reproduces for me on branch_5_5, but not on master or branch_6x. -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Feb 13, 2017, at 9:03 PM, Apache Jenkins Server > wrote: > > Build: https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-Solr-Tests-5.5/26/ > > 1 tests failed. > FAILED: org.apache.lucene.index.Tes

Re: Welcome Toke Eskildsen as a Lucene/Solr committer

Welcome Toke! -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Feb 14, 2017, at 7:09 AM, Jan Høydahl wrote: > > I'm pleased to announce that Toke Eskildsen has accepted the Lucene > PMC's invitation to become a committer. > > Toke, it's tradition that you introduce yourself with a brief bio. > > Your account

Re: Reference guide editing: newbie notes and kudos to Cassandra and Hoss:

> On May 30, 2017, at 2:04 PM, Erick Erickson wrote: > > 4> I don't think minor edits require a JIRA, larger ones maybe. Pretty > much just like the CWiki I suppose. One more thing I ran into while making the changes on SOLR-10758: 5> I included a new "Ref Guide” section under the 6.6 release

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 6.6.0 RC5

Hi Mike, > On May 30, 2017, at 5:07 PM, Mike Drob wrote: > > Was able to reproduce on both the unpacked RC and on branch_6_6 in the repo > with > > ant test -Dtestcase=ReplaceNodeTest -Dtests.seed=545A8F7F914CAA60 > -Dtests.asserts=true > > My environment: > > Apache Ant(TM) version 1.10.1

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 6.6.0 RC5

+1 Lucene docs, changes and javadocs look good, and the smoke tester was happy: SUCCESS! [0:45:38.111474] -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On May 30, 2017, at 2:07 PM, Ishan Chattopadhyaya wrote: > > Please vote for release candidate 5 for Lucene/Solr 6.6.0 > > > The artifacts can be downloade

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 6.6.0 RC5

(seconds, -t) unlimited > > max user processes (-u) 709 > > virtual memory (kbytes, -v) unlimited > > > > Do you think that open files limit is too low? I didn't see any evidence in > the log of that (could easily have missed it thoug

Re: Release planning for 7.0

I see zero benefits from cutting branch_7x now. Shawn, can you describe why you think we should do this? My interpretation of your argument is that you’re in favor of delaying cutting branch_7_0 until feature freeze - which BTW is the status quo - but I don’t get why that argues for cutting br

Re: Release planning for 7.0

> On Jun 2, 2017, at 5:40 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote: > > On 6/2/2017 10:23 AM, Steve Rowe wrote: > >> I see zero benefits from cutting branch_7x now. Shawn, can you describe why >> you think we should do this? >> >> My interpretation of your argument

Re: Test framework ignoring -Dtestmethod

Hi Joel, Looks like testSignifcantTermsStream is misspelled? (missing “i” between “f” and “c”) —- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Feb 21, 2017, at 1:23 PM, Joel Bernstein wrote: > > > A test I've just added is being ignored when it's being called with the > -Dtestmethod. > > Here is the com

Re: 6.4.2 release?

Hi Christine, > On Feb 22, 2017, at 5:10 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) > wrote: > > What process do people typically follow w.r.t. updating CHANGES.txt on > branch_6x and master in those circumstances e.g. do the entries move from the > 6.5 to the 6.4.2 section or are they dupli

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-6.x-Solaris (64bit/jdk1.8.0) - Build # 682 - Failure!

I’m working on syncing the branch_6x and master versions of solr/CHANGES.txt to fix this and other problems. -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Feb 22, 2017, at 7:12 AM, Policeman Jenkins Server > wrote: > > Build: https://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-Solr-6.x-Solaris/682/ > Java: 64bit/jdk1.

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-Tests-master - Build # 1693 - Unstable

Looks like these failures are due at least in part to SOLR-9640 - I’ve commented there. -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Feb 24, 2017, at 5:49 PM, Apache Jenkins Server > wrote: > > Build: https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-Solr-Tests-master/1693/ > > 1204 tests failed. > FAILED: org.apac

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-6.x-Windows (64bit/jdk1.8.0_121) - Build # 750 - Still Unstable!

Hi Jan, See the notes I wrote up on . -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Feb 25, 2017, at 4:16 PM, Jan Høydahl wrote: > > Tried to reproduce this locally on Mac, but did not succeed. Windows > specific? Race condition? > > -- > Jan Høydahl, sea

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 6.4.2 RC1

+1 Changes, docs and javadocs look good, and the smoke tester is happy: SUCCESS! [0:26:36.341312] -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Mar 2, 2017, at 11:54 AM, Adrien Grand wrote: > > +1 SUCCESS! [1:28:36.969549] > > Le jeu. 2 mars 2017 à 17:47, David Smiley a écrit : > The 2nd time I ran it,

Re: Welcome Mike Drob as Lucene/Solr committer

Welcome Mike! -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On May 8, 2017, at 11:42 AM, Mark Miller wrote: > > I'm pleased to announce that Mike Drob has accepted the PMC's > invitation to become a committer. > > Mike, it's tradition that you introduce yourself with a brief bio / > origin story, explaining h

Re: More ASF Jenkins job triggering problems

> On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 6:43 PM, Steve Rowe wrote: > Mikhail alerted me to the fact that the Lucene-Artifacts-6.x job hasn’t run > recently on ASF Jenkins. This job is a “downstream project” of > Lucene-Solr-NightlyTests-6.x, i.e. once the latter has finished building, the > for

Re: More ASF Jenkins job triggering problems

queue and then actually getting run. I’ll keep an eye on it. -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On May 8, 2017, at 1:57 PM, Steve Rowe wrote: > > I let pono know on Friday (via #lucene IRC) that the -Artifacts jobs were > still not being triggered, and he said he would research the A

Re: 6.6 Release branch

Hi Alex, > On May 10, 2017, at 5:53 AM, Alexandre Rafalovitch wrote: > > Looking at the CHANGES file, I noticed one of the entries is missing the > author: > https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/blob/efed0277dd3fe9b7e81f260f4f2d4fc023eea50d/solr/CHANGES.txt#L252-L253 > SOLR-10357 Thanks, I fi

Re: [JENKINS] Solr-reference-guide-6.6 - Build # 3 - Still Failing

For some reason the checked-out commit is the one just before Cassandra cherry-picked the ref guide squash merge onto branch_6_6, so the solr/solr-ref-guide/ directory isn’t present. I don’t see anything in the job config that would cause this. Thinking the issue was maybe timing, I manually r

Re: [JENKINS] Solr-reference-guide-6.6 - Build # 4 - Still Failing

Can you be more specific Uwe? I looked at and I don’t see anywhere I can specify where to checkout relative to the workspace root. Aso, I cloned the branch_6x job to create the branch_6_6, and the branch_6x job is working fine.

Re: [JENKINS] Solr-reference-guide-6.6 - Build # 4 - Still Failing

Uwe, > On May 12, 2017, at 12:00 PM, Uwe Schindler wrote: > > Ah by the way: I changed the master job a bit. Instead of "archiving" the > HTML docs as "artifact", I used the "publish javadocs" post-build step to > publish it as conventional Javadocs. This makes it show as "Documentation" > li

Re: [JENKINS] Solr-reference-guide-6.6 - Build # 4 - Still Failing

on for the URL). Also, with this change we now have to provide two separate URLs for each branch, one for each format. On balance, I guess I'm okay with leaving it this way. -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On May 12, 2017, at 12:15 PM, Steve Rowe wrote: > > Uwe, > >>

Re: [JENKINS] Solr-reference-guide-6.6 - Build # 3 - Still Failing

out". > This brings the checkout into a pristine state and reverts any changes. I did > this for master, too. > > Uwe > > - > Uwe Schindler > Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen > http://www.thetaphi.de > eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > >> -Original

Re: [JENKINS] Solr-reference-guide-6.6 - Build # 3 - Still Failing

Steve www.lucidworks.com > On May 12, 2017, at 12:41 PM, Steve Rowe wrote: > > Thanks Uwe, I’ll make that change on the 6.x job. > > I deleted the branch_6_6 job and re-cloned from the master job (including > your changes), but it still checks out an old commit. > > I’ll ask

Re: Release 6.6

Ishan, Okay to include https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7821 for 6.6? -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On May 12, 2017, at 12:51 PM, jim ferenczi wrote: > > Ok thanks Ishan. > > Le 12 mai 2017 18:44, "Ishan Chattopadhyaya" a > écrit : > Sure, Jim. Please go ahead! > > On Fri, May

Re: Release 6.5

Hi Jim, I’ve granted you the Administrators and Committers roles on the LUCENE and SOLR JIRA projects. AFAICT only the PMC Chair can make you a Jenkins admin: . I’ve CC’d Tommaso on this email. -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On

Re: Release 6.5

> On Mar 17, 2017, at 7:23 AM, Steve Rowe wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > I’ve granted you the Administrators and Committers roles on the LUCENE and > SOLR JIRA projects. > > AFAICT only the PMC Chair can make you a Jenkins admin: > <https://wiki.apache.org/general/Jen

Re: Release 6.5

h early > next week if there is no objection. > > 2017-03-17 12:31 GMT+01:00 jim ferenczi : > Thanks Steve ! > > 2017-03-17 12:23 GMT+01:00 Steve Rowe : > Hi Jim, > > I’ve granted you the Administrators and Committers roles on the LUCENE and > SOLR JIRA projects. >

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-master-Windows (64bit/jdk1.8.0_121) - Build # 6460 - Still Unstable!

Files named “con[0-9]?” (and “prn[0-9]?”, etc.?) anger Windows. I thought this got fixed a while back? I can’t find any JIRAs for it though. -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Mar 19, 2017, at 1:06 PM, Policeman Jenkins Server > wrote: > > Build: https://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-Solr-mas

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-master-Windows (64bit/jdk1.8.0_121) - Build # 6460 - Still Unstable!

ple, AUX.txt) -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Mar 19, 2017, at 4:15 PM, Steve Rowe wrote: > > Files named “con[0-9]?” (and “prn[0-9]?”, etc.?) anger Windows. > > I thought this got fixed a while back? I can’t find any JIRAs for it though. > > -- > Steve > w

Re: Release 6.5

Hi Jim, I’ll go set up the 6.5 jobs now. -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Mar 20, 2017, at 2:20 PM, jim ferenczi wrote: > > It's not. I want to create the first RC tomorrow but we need to setup the > Jenkins jobs for the 6.5 branch first. I don't have the admin right with my > account yet so

Re: Release 6.5

Oops, forgot to enqueue the smoke tester job. That’s done now too. -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Mar 20, 2017, at 3:03 PM, Steve Rowe wrote: > > Done. I also removed the 6.4 jobs. > > I’ve queued the three test jobs to run after the currently running job > finishes; t

<    5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   >