River people, we need one more person who's willing to review River's
latest release.
Any volunteers?
Regards,
Peter.
the release packages, which we can vote on.
I'd kind of like to complete this process by the end of the month.
Cheers,
Greg.
On Thu, 2013-03-28 at 15:14, Dennis Reedy wrote:
Hi,
Was wondering how we are doing with getting the next release out the door?
I'd like to suggest that we move
On Apr 22, 2013, at 848AM, Greg Trasuk wrote:
Hi all:
I've been testing the 2.2 branch locally in a few environments, and I
haven't seen anything that looks like anything but local configuration
issues. So I'd like to move forward with the release process (steps
will be described
this process by the end of the month.
Cheers,
Greg.
On Thu, 2013-03-28 at 15:14, Dennis Reedy wrote:
Hi,
Was wondering how we are doing with getting the next release out the door?
I'd
like to suggest that we move on this as soon as possible If there are issues
that do come up
On 4/7/13 4:25 AM, Greg Trasuk wrote:
The 2.2 branch is very clean. It starts from release in 2011. Since
then, Dennis applied RIVER-417, added poms for listing at Maven Central,
and applied the Levels fix. I've applied RIVER-149, and that's it.
Probably to Dennis. I noticed that what was
The situation would still have occurred, the release process was
delayed by synchronization bugs, without which the release would have
been much simpler with fewer changes. Of course the code is actually
much better now, so it's not a bad situation, we just need to make sure
testing is very
We created a qa-refactoring branch for concurrency work
On 3 April 2013 22:10, Peter j...@zeus.net.au wrote:
Not a good idea, the qa-refactoring branch was created recently to address
the concurrency bugs in trunk.
- Original message -
On Apr 2, 2013, at 750AM, Peter
Right so we're into brutal tradeoffs aren't we?
It's beginning to smell like none of the available branches are suitable
for doing releases from. So we need a branch that is.
i.e. We shouldn't just pick a branch we have, we should get one sorted and
right now.
What are our chances of pulling
On 6 April 2013 14:44, Dennis Reedy dennis.re...@gmail.com wrote:
On Apr 6, 2013, at 532AM, Dan Creswell wrote:
Right so we're into brutal tradeoffs aren't we?
It's beginning to smell like none of the available branches are suitable
for doing releases from. So we need a branch that is.
Just to clarify:
Dennis Greg are using the 2.2.0 branch from last release to fix Levels
and release 2.2.1
trunk started failing tests after some unrelated changes exposed
synchronization errors in the qa tests, since then
skunk/qa-refactoring is being used to fix synchronization issues
The 2.2 branch is very clean. It starts from release in 2011. Since
then, Dennis applied RIVER-417, added poms for listing at Maven Central,
and applied the Levels fix. I've applied RIVER-149, and that's it.
A few days ago, I set out to see what else from the trunk should be
rolled in for a
At the risk of de-railing the conversation, is there an option to move to
git for Apache Foundation projects such as River? I was long a big
proponent of SVN but I'm now thoroughly converted and can't help but think
this situation wouldn't have occurred if git were in use. (Yes, it's
possible to
Did we have a branching policy discussion? I recall we decided not to
do too much in the trunk. In any case, I think your suggestion works,
barring any other opinions. I was thinking of creating a 2.2.1 branch
first, and then applying patches to that, but assuming there wasn't
anything big
On Apr 3, 2013, at 1115AM, Greg Trasuk wrote:
Did we have a branching policy discussion?
I was looking here: http://river.apache.org/development-process.html (scroll
down to Branching Policy)
I recall we decided not to
do too much in the trunk. In any case, I think your suggestion
On Apr 3, 2013, at 120PM, Greg Trasuk wrote:
On Wed, 2013-04-03 at 12:12, Dennis Reedy wrote:
On Apr 3, 2013, at 1115AM, Greg Trasuk wrote:
Did we have a branching policy discussion?
I was looking here: http://river.apache.org/development-process.html (scroll
down to Branching
the poms in skunk/qa-refactoring? I've included the
logging fix.
Regards,
Peter.
- Original message -
On Mar 28, 2013, at 631PM, Peter Firmstone wrote:
Dennis Reedy wrote:
Hi,
Was wondering how we are doing with getting the next release out
Thanks for that, appreciate it.
Couple of questions to clarify...
On 1 April 2013 12:13, Peter Firmstone j...@zeus.net.au wrote:
Shown below is both a passing test result and a failing one, logging =
FINEST.
Lease.FOREVER is actually set to 60,000.
I take it you mean that the test's own
Dan Creswell wrote:
Thanks for that, appreciate it.
Couple of questions to clarify...
On 1 April 2013 12:13, Peter Firmstone j...@zeus.net.au wrote:
Shown below is both a passing test result and a failing one, logging =
FINEST.
Lease.FOREVER is actually set to 60,000.
I take it
you update the poms in skunk/qa-refactoring? I've included the logging
fix.
Regards,
Peter.
- Original message -
On Mar 28, 2013, at 631PM, Peter Firmstone wrote:
Dennis Reedy wrote:
Hi,
Was wondering how we are doing with getting the next
Hi,
Was wondering how we are doing with getting the next release out the door? I'd
like to suggest that we move on this as soon as possible If there are issues
that do come up with the release, we can always release again.
Regards
Dennis
Agreed, particularly if the JDK 7 issue has been resolved, it'd be good to
get a release out there.
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 7:14 PM, Dennis Reedy dennis.re...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi,
Was wondering how we are doing with getting the next release out the door?
I'd like to suggest that we move
Dennis Reedy wrote:
Hi,
Was wondering how we are doing with getting the next release out the door? I'd
like to suggest that we move on this as soon as possible If there are issues
that do come up with the release, we can always release again.
Regards
Dennis
We can safely ignore
On Mar 28, 2013, at 631PM, Peter Firmstone wrote:
Dennis Reedy wrote:
Hi,
Was wondering how we are doing with getting the next release out the door?
I'd like to suggest that we move on this as soon as possible If there are
issues that do come up with the release, we can always release
Simon IJskes - QCG wrote:
On 28-10-12 15:47, Simon IJskes - QCG wrote:
On 28-10-12 15:45, Simon IJskes - QCG wrote:
On 28-10-12 15:43, Tom Hobbs wrote:
Can someone refresh my memory, please? I recall a few months ago we
were
talking about gearing up for a release. Is there any reason why we
Sounds like the tests might need to be refactored.
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 4:09 AM, Peter Firmstone j...@zeus.net.au wrote:
I've noticed some new classes in the net.jini namespace, we need to move
them to org.apache.river prior to release please, unless there is a good
reason they should be
On 01-11-12 14:35, Gerard Fulton wrote:
Sounds like the tests might need to be refactored.
Indeed. Or a revert of the patches causing the tests to fail.
Gr. Simon
Simon IJskes - QCG wrote:
On 01-11-12 14:35, Gerard Fulton wrote:
Sounds like the tests might need to be refactored.
Indeed. Or a revert of the patches causing the tests to fail.
Gr. Simon
Er, no, the URI patches aren't causing the tests to fail, the tests are
configured with unsupported
On 28-10-12 15:47, Simon IJskes - QCG wrote:
On 28-10-12 15:45, Simon IJskes - QCG wrote:
On 28-10-12 15:43, Tom Hobbs wrote:
Can someone refresh my memory, please? I recall a few months ago we
were
talking about gearing up for a release. Is there any reason why we
can't
cut one now-ish?
Can someone refresh my memory, please? I recall a few months ago we were
talking about gearing up for a release. Is there any reason why we can't
cut one now-ish?
Cheers,
Tom
On 28-10-12 15:43, Tom Hobbs wrote:
Can someone refresh my memory, please? I recall a few months ago we were
talking about gearing up for a release. Is there any reason why we can't
cut one now-ish?
none. go for it!
--
QCG, Software voor het MKB, 071-5890970, http://www.qcg.nl
Quality
On 28-10-12 15:45, Simon IJskes - QCG wrote:
On 28-10-12 15:43, Tom Hobbs wrote:
Can someone refresh my memory, please? I recall a few months ago we were
talking about gearing up for a release. Is there any reason why we can't
cut one now-ish?
none. go for it!
Although, what do we do with
I'm not going to be able to finish my stuff and test it well enough to
get it into the next release.
Peter; are you happy with your commits and merging? Are we ready to
start cutting a new release yet?
Does anyone else have any additional code etc they want rolled into
the next release?
Cheers
I've reviewed the proposed patch for
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RIVER-395, and I think it should
be incorporated in the release. I'm working on a QA test for it, but
could check it in untested if you like.
Patricia
On 4/10/2011 1:09 PM, Tom Hobbs wrote:
Hi guys,
So including
No, that's great. Let's wait on your test for that and then put it to
the vote.
Is anyone else working on anything specific for this release?
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 9:23 PM, Patricia Shanahan p...@acm.org wrote:
I've reviewed the proposed patch for
I think there are some other things we might consider:
(1) Do the tests in question always fail and only on SPARC?
(2) Do the tests in question contain any SPARC specific code?
(3) Does the code being tested contain any SPARC specific code?
(4) How many cores are available on the SPARC's in
i am stating that the first graduated release should work for everyone
period. after that if you want to release with known bugs and reduce/not
support sparc or whatever other platform you in your infinite wisdom deem
irrelevant , great. river should have one release it can point at for anyone
, Cray Research, and Sun Microsystems.
Maybe we'll find the SPARC failure quickly, and it will have a simple
fix. In that case, I'm sure we should include the fix in the next release.
Suppose it does not work out that way. Then we face a trade-off. How
long should we hold up the next release
Here's a key question for the future. Are there users that need River on
SPARC? Do we go on supporting it? Does anyone care enough to make a
SPARC development environment available?
Patricia
I've just acquired a pair of Sun Ultra 5 workstations, but haven't had a
chance to set them up or
Is that a newly introduced failure? I'm wondering if we can do a release
anyway.
I vaguely recall Peter and Sim talking about the steps required to do a
release a while back. Sim, did yoh get anywhere with it?
please don't release anything with failures. i've been a big fan/user of
jini since it was released. now that it is alive again via river, a good
release history will be key to success/survival
jason
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Tom Hobbs tvho...@googlemail.com wrote:
Is that a newly
40 matches
Mail list logo
