Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[David Smiley]

e upgrade notes in
> CHANGES.txt.
>
> What do other people think about this?
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com> wrote:
>
>
> Also, I think it might make sense to add a line saying that the Ref Guide
> for 7.0 would be released soon.
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:20 AM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com> wrote:
>
> Sounds good.
>
> Also, I am not a java expert like Uwe, and a few others here so let me
> know if we should leave in the ‘Jigsaw’ part.
>
> David, you added that yesterday and Mike looked at the Lucene release
> notes and let it stay there. So I was wondering if it’s
> important/reasonable
> enough to highlight in the release notes.
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:12 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I would also consider changing the order of the list to highlight the
> most interesting features.
>
> If I saw this as the top highlight I would think of this is mainly a
> maintenance release.
>
>
> Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
>  pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML
> format.
>
>
>
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> I just made the edit.
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> For streaming expressions let's go with:
>
> Solr 7 Streaming Expressions adds a new statistical programming syntax
> for
> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series
> and
> graph result sets.
>
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/
> LONDON) <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
>
>
> Cool. How about 7th and 8th bullet points like this. 8th bullet ending
> in Java 9 future magic still, not that the magic counts but fitting things
> on roughly a screen full for folks to easily get the gist of the new
> release
> is important I think.
>
> -Christine
>
> * Solr 7 adds Streaming Expressions, a new statistical programming
> syntax for
> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series
> and
> graph result sets.
>
> * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9
>
> From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 09/20/17 15:54:54
> To: Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON ) , dev@lucene.apache.org
>
> Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts
>
> This looks good, other than the wt=xml correction in #1, as Varun
> pointed out. Also, I really think we should highlight streaming expressions
> (Math Engine) even if that means we don’t hit the ‘7 points’ mark :).
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
> On Sep 20, 2017, at 7:21 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON)
> <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
>
> Totally agree with choosing _7_ highlights for the Solr _7_ release!
>
> Below is the revised draft I came up with:
>
> (Notice that v2 is the 2nd bullet, though I think it yet needs to
> mention one or _two_ benefits of using the new API especially since we
> mention that /solr/ continues to work.)
>
> (Also notice some re-ordering of the bullets starting with the
> used-by-many JSON first, then v2 API second, then third collection creation
> which mentions faceting and so leads over to the fourth bullet re: facet
> refinement. Fifth is the new replica types (that bullet being slightly
> longer than the others to explain what the types are about). Sixth is
> auto-scaling which mentions future releases (would folks use new replica
> types first before moving on to auto-scaling?). Seventh and last then is
> Solr _7_ mention with Java _9_ i.e. the just-arrived future again there.)
>
> Solr 7.0 Release Highlights:
>
> * Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
> pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML
> format.
>
> * The new v2 API, exposed at /api/ and also supported via SolrJ, is
> now the
> preferred API, but /solr/ continues to work.
>
> * A new `_default` configset is used if no config is specified at
> collection
> creation. The data-driven functionality of this configset indexes
> strings as
> analyzed text while at the same time copying to a `*_str` field
> suitable for
> faceting.
>
> * The JSON Facet API now supports two-phase facet refinement to ensure
> accurate
> counts and statistics for facet buckets

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Jan Høydahl]

gt; Joel Bernstein
>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Also, I think it might make sense to add a line saying that the Ref Guide
>>>> for 7.0 would be released soon.
>>>> 
>>>> -Anshum
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:20 AM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Sounds good.
>>>> 
>>>> Also, I am not a java expert like Uwe, and a few others here so let me
>>>> know if we should leave in the ‘Jigsaw’ part.
>>>> 
>>>> David, you added that yesterday and Mike looked at the Lucene release
>>>> notes and let it stay there. So I was wondering if it’s 
>>>> important/reasonable
>>>> enough to highlight in the release notes.
>>>> 
>>>> -Anshum
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:12 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I would also consider changing the order of the list to highlight the
>>>> most interesting features.
>>>> 
>>>> If I saw this as the top highlight I would think of this is mainly a
>>>> maintenance release.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
>>>>  pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML
>>>> format.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Joel Bernstein
>>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>>> 
>>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> I just made the edit.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Joel Bernstein
>>>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> For streaming expressions let's go with:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Solr 7 Streaming Expressions adds a new statistical programming syntax
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> graph result sets.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Joel Bernstein
>>>>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/
>>>>>> LONDON) <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Cool. How about 7th and 8th bullet points like this. 8th bullet ending
>>>>>>> in Java 9 future magic still, not that the magic counts but fitting 
>>>>>>> things
>>>>>>> on roughly a screen full for folks to easily get the gist of the new 
>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>> is important I think.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> -Christine
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> * Solr 7 adds Streaming Expressions, a new statistical programming
>>>>>>> syntax for
>>>>>>> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> graph result sets.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 09/20/17 15:54:54
>>>>>>> To: Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON ) , dev@lucene.apache.org
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> This looks good, other than the wt=xml correction in #1, as Varun
>>>>>>> pointed out. Also, I really think we should highlight streaming 
>>>>>>> expressions
>>>>>>> (Math Engine) even if that means we don’t hit the ‘7 points’ mark :).
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> -Anshum
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Sep 20, 2017, at 7:21 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON)
>>>>>>> 

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Cassandra Targett]

ght I would think of this is mainly a
>>> maintenance release.
>>>
>>>
>>> Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
>>>   pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML
>>> format.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Joel Bernstein
>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I just made the edit.
>>>>
>>>> Joel Bernstein
>>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> For streaming expressions let's go with:
>>>>>
>>>>> Solr 7 Streaming Expressions adds a new statistical programming syntax
>>>>> for
>>>>> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series
>>>>> and
>>>>> graph result sets.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Joel Bernstein
>>>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/
>>>>> LONDON) <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cool. How about 7th and 8th bullet points like this. 8th bullet ending
>>>>>> in Java 9 future magic still, not that the magic counts but fitting 
>>>>>> things
>>>>>> on roughly a screen full for folks to easily get the gist of the new 
>>>>>> release
>>>>>> is important I think.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Christine
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * Solr 7 adds Streaming Expressions, a new statistical programming
>>>>>> syntax for
>>>>>> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> graph result sets.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 09/20/17 15:54:54
>>>>>> To: Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON ) , dev@lucene.apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This looks good, other than the wt=xml correction in #1, as Varun
>>>>>> pointed out. Also, I really think we should highlight streaming 
>>>>>> expressions
>>>>>> (Math Engine) even if that means we don’t hit the ‘7 points’ mark :).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Anshum
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sep 20, 2017, at 7:21 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON)
>>>>>> <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Totally agree with choosing _7_ highlights for the Solr _7_ release!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Below is the revised draft I came up with:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (Notice that v2 is the 2nd bullet, though I think it yet needs to
>>>>>> mention one or _two_ benefits of using the new API especially since we
>>>>>> mention that /solr/ continues to work.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (Also notice some re-ordering of the bullets starting with the
>>>>>> used-by-many JSON first, then v2 API second, then third collection 
>>>>>> creation
>>>>>> which mentions faceting and so leads over to the fourth bullet re: facet
>>>>>> refinement. Fifth is the new replica types (that bullet being slightly
>>>>>> longer than the others to explain what the types are about). Sixth is
>>>>>> auto-scaling which mentions future releases (would folks use new replica
>>>>>> types first before moving on to auto-scaling?). Seventh and last then is
>>>>>> Solr _7_ mention with Java _9_ i.e. the just-arrived future again there.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Solr 7.0 Release Highlights:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
>>>>>> pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML
>>>>>> format.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * The new v2 API, e

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Anshum Gupta]

>>>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com 
>>>>> <mailto:joels...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>> For streaming expressions let's go with:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Solr 7 Streaming Expressions adds a new statistical programming syntax for
>>>>> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
>>>>> graph result sets.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Joel Bernstein
>>>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ <http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/>
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) 
>>>>> <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net <mailto:cpoersc...@bloomberg.net>> wrote:
>>>>> Cool. How about 7th and 8th bullet points like this. 8th bullet ending in 
>>>>> Java 9 future magic still, not that the magic counts but fitting things 
>>>>> on roughly a screen full for folks to easily get the gist of the new 
>>>>> release is important I think.
>>>>> 
>>>>> -Christine
>>>>> 
>>>>> * Solr 7 adds Streaming Expressions, a new statistical programming syntax 
>>>>> for
>>>>>   the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
>>>>>   graph result sets.
>>>>> 
>>>>> * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9
>>>>> 
>>>>> From: dev@lucene.apache.org <mailto:dev@lucene.apache.org> At: 09/20/17 
>>>>> 15:54:54
>>>>> To:  Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON )  
>>>>> <mailto:cpoersc...@bloomberg.net>,  dev@lucene.apache.org 
>>>>> <mailto:dev@lucene.apache.org>
>>>>> 
>>>>> Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts
>>>>> This looks good, other than the wt=xml correction in #1, as Varun pointed 
>>>>> out. Also, I really think we should highlight streaming expressions (Math 
>>>>> Engine) even if that means we don’t hit the ‘7 points’ mark :).
>>>>> 
>>>>> -Anshum
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Sep 20, 2017, at 7:21 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) 
>>>>>> <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net <mailto:cpoersc...@bloomberg.net>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Totally agree with choosing _7_ highlights for the Solr _7_ release!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Below is the revised draft I came up with:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> (Notice that v2 is the 2nd bullet, though I think it yet needs to 
>>>>>> mention one or _two_ benefits of using the new API especially since we 
>>>>>> mention that /solr/ continues to work.)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> (Also notice some re-ordering of the bullets starting with the 
>>>>>> used-by-many JSON first, then v2 API second, then third collection 
>>>>>> creation which mentions faceting and so leads over to the fourth bullet 
>>>>>> re: facet refinement. Fifth is the new replica types (that bullet being 
>>>>>> slightly longer than the others to explain what the types are about). 
>>>>>> Sixth is auto-scaling which mentions future releases (would folks use 
>>>>>> new replica types first before moving on to auto-scaling?). Seventh and 
>>>>>> last then is Solr _7_ mention with Java _9_ i.e. the just-arrived future 
>>>>>> again there.)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Solr 7.0 Release Highlights:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> * Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
>>>>>>   pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML 
>>>>>> format.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> * The new v2 API, exposed at /api/ and also supported via SolrJ, is now 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>   preferred API, but /solr/ continues to work.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> * A new `_default` configset is used if no config is specified at 
>>>>>> collection
>>>>>>   creation. The data-driven functionality of this configset indexes 
>>>>>> strings as
>>>>>>   analyzed text while at the same time copying to a `*_str` field 
>>>>>> suitable for
>>>>>>   faceting.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> * The JSON Facet API now supports two-phase facet refinement to ensure 
>>>>>> accurate
>>>>>>   counts and statistics for facet buckets returned in distributed mode.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> * Replica Types - Solr 7 supports different replica types, which handle 
>>>>>> updates
>>>>>>   differently. In addition to pure NRT operation where all replicas 
>>>>>> build an
>>>>>>   index and keep a replication log, you can now also add so called PULL
>>>>>>   replicas, achieving the read-speed optimized benefits of a master/slave
>>>>>>   setup while at the same time keeping index redundancy.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> * Auto-scaling. Solr can now allocate new replicas to nodes using a new 
>>>>>> auto
>>>>>>   scaling policy framework. This framework will in future releases 
>>>>>> enable Solr
>>>>>>   to move shards around based on load, disk etc.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> From: dev@lucene.apache.org <> At: 09/20/17 15:02:38
>>>>>> To:  dev@lucene.apache.org <>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 9:16 AM Jan Høydahl <jan@cominvent.com 
>>>>>> <mailto:jan@cominvent.com>> wrote:
>>>>>> And please, I was serious about choosing 7 major features and not adding 
>>>>>> random single improvements. The list has already creeped from 7 to 9 
>>>>>> bullets. If you want to add something, then ask youself which of the 
>>>>>> other bullets that are less important to MOST USERS and then replace 
>>>>>> that bullet instead of adding more. Agree?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I agree with that very much!  Each bullet added de-values the list as a 
>>>>>> whole.  IMO the Java 9 bullet can be removed (too few are even using it 
>>>>>> yet) and we get to 8 bullets; and those 8 are pretty good. 
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>> Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
>>>>>> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley 
>>>>>> <http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley> | Book: 
>>>>>> http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com 
>>>>>> <http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com/>
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Anshum Gupta]

+1 on keeping that section. I just read it wrong I guess, and assumed you 
wanted to remove that section.

-Anshum



> On Sep 20, 2017, at 9:55 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I think we should keep all the typical wording around upgrades. I'm just 
> suggesting an arrangement of the highlights section.
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ <http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/>
> 
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 12:43 PM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com 
> <mailto:ansh...@apple.com>> wrote:
> Joel, I was actually asking if you meant removing the following section:
> 
> Being a major release, Solr 7 removes many deprecated APIs, changes various 
> parameter defaults and
> behavior. Some changes may require a re-index of your content. You are thus 
> encouraged to thoroughly
> read the "Upgrade Notes" at 
> http://lucene.apache.org/solr/7_0_0/changes/Changes.html 
> <http://lucene.apache.org/solr/7_0_0/changes/Changes.html> or in the
> CHANGES.txt file accompanying the release.
> 
> Uwe: I am ready with all my (website) changes, and just waiting on the Solr 
> ‘news’ section that is a subset of the release notes. From the looks of it, 
> we are done with the changes, and I can copy the relevant sections and commit 
> the website changes. So yes, the release would happen on the 20th :)
> 
> -Anshum
> 
> 
> 
>> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:34 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com 
>> <mailto:joels...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> I think the release highlights are about what's exciting in the release. So 
>> leading with the most exciting features is the way to go. Informing people 
>> of changes that will affect them can be done in the upgrade notes in 
>> CHANGES.txt.
>> 
>> What do other people think about this?
>> 
>> Joel Bernstein
>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ <http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/>
>> 
>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com 
>> <mailto:ansh...@apple.com>> wrote:
>> Also, I think it might make sense to add a line saying that the Ref Guide 
>> for 7.0 would be released soon.
>> 
>> -Anshum
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:20 AM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com 
>>> <mailto:ansh...@apple.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Sounds good.
>>> 
>>> Also, I am not a java expert like Uwe, and a few others here so let me know 
>>> if we should leave in the ‘Jigsaw’ part.
>>> 
>>> David, you added that yesterday and Mike looked at the Lucene release notes 
>>> and let it stay there. So I was wondering if it’s important/reasonable 
>>> enough to highlight in the release notes.
>>> 
>>> -Anshum
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:12 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com 
>>>> <mailto:joels...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I would also consider changing the order of the list to highlight the most 
>>>> interesting features.
>>>> 
>>>> If I saw this as the top highlight I would think of this is mainly a 
>>>> maintenance release. 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
>>>>   pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML format.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Joel Bernstein
>>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ <http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/>
>>>> 
>>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com 
>>>> <mailto:joels...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> I just made the edit.
>>>> 
>>>> Joel Bernstein
>>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ <http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/>
>>>> 
>>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com 
>>>> <mailto:joels...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> For streaming expressions let's go with:
>>>> 
>>>> Solr 7 Streaming Expressions adds a new statistical programming syntax for
>>>> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
>>>> graph result sets.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Joel Bernstein
>>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ <http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/>
>>>> 
>>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) 
>>>> <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net <mailto:cpoer

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Joel Bernstein]

I think we should keep all the typical wording around upgrades. I'm just
suggesting an arrangement of the highlights section.

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

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 12:43 PM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com> wrote:

> Joel, I was actually asking if you meant removing the following section:
>
> Being a major release, Solr 7 removes many deprecated APIs, changes various 
> parameter defaults andbehavior. Some changes may require a re-index of your 
> content. You are thus encouraged to thoroughlyread the "Upgrade Notes" at 
> http://lucene.apache.org/solr/7_0_0/changes/Changes.html or in theCHANGES.txt 
> file accompanying the release.
>
>
> Uwe: I am ready with all my (website) changes, and just waiting on the
> Solr ‘news’ section that is a subset of the release notes. From the looks
> of it, we are done with the changes, and I can copy the relevant sections
> and commit the website changes. So yes, the release would happen on the
> 20th :)
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:34 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think the release highlights are about what's exciting in the release.
> So leading with the most exciting features is the way to go. Informing
> people of changes that will affect them can be done in the upgrade notes in
> CHANGES.txt.
>
> What do other people think about this?
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com> wrote:
>
>> Also, I think it might make sense to add a line saying that the Ref Guide
>> for 7.0 would be released soon.
>>
>> -Anshum
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:20 AM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com> wrote:
>>
>> Sounds good.
>>
>> Also, I am not a java expert like Uwe, and a few others here so let me
>> know if we should leave in the ‘Jigsaw’ part.
>>
>> David, you added that yesterday and Mike looked at the Lucene release
>> notes and let it stay there. So I was wondering if it’s
>> important/reasonable enough to highlight in the release notes.
>>
>> -Anshum
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:12 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I would also consider changing the order of the list to highlight the
>> most interesting features.
>>
>> If I saw this as the top highlight I would think of this is mainly a
>> maintenance release.
>>
>>
>> Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,  pass wt=json 
>> and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML format.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Joel Bernstein
>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I just made the edit.
>>>
>>> Joel Bernstein
>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> For streaming expressions let's go with:
>>>>
>>>> Solr 7 Streaming Expressions adds a new statistical programming syntax
>>>> for
>>>> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
>>>> graph result sets.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Joel Bernstein
>>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/
>>>> LONDON) <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Cool. How about 7th and 8th bullet points like this. 8th bullet
>>>>> ending in Java 9 future magic still, not that the magic counts but fitting
>>>>> things on roughly a screen full for folks to easily get the gist of the 
>>>>> new
>>>>> release is important I think.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Christine
>>>>>
>>>>> * Solr 7 adds Streaming Expressions, a new statistical programming
>>>>> syntax for
>>>>> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series
>>>>> and
>>>>> graph result sets.
>>>>>
>>>>> * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9
>>>>>
>>>>> From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 09/20/17 15:54:54
>>>>> To: Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON )
>>>>> <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net>, dev@lucene.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>> Subj

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Anshum Gupta]

Joel, I was actually asking if you meant removing the following section:

Being a major release, Solr 7 removes many deprecated APIs, changes various 
parameter defaults and
behavior. Some changes may require a re-index of your content. You are thus 
encouraged to thoroughly
read the "Upgrade Notes" at 
http://lucene.apache.org/solr/7_0_0/changes/Changes.html or in the
CHANGES.txt file accompanying the release.

Uwe: I am ready with all my (website) changes, and just waiting on the Solr 
‘news’ section that is a subset of the release notes. From the looks of it, we 
are done with the changes, and I can copy the relevant sections and commit the 
website changes. So yes, the release would happen on the 20th :)

-Anshum



> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:34 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I think the release highlights are about what's exciting in the release. So 
> leading with the most exciting features is the way to go. Informing people of 
> changes that will affect them can be done in the upgrade notes in CHANGES.txt.
> 
> What do other people think about this?
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ <http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/>
> 
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com 
> <mailto:ansh...@apple.com>> wrote:
> Also, I think it might make sense to add a line saying that the Ref Guide for 
> 7.0 would be released soon.
> 
> -Anshum
> 
> 
> 
>> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:20 AM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com 
>> <mailto:ansh...@apple.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> Sounds good.
>> 
>> Also, I am not a java expert like Uwe, and a few others here so let me know 
>> if we should leave in the ‘Jigsaw’ part.
>> 
>> David, you added that yesterday and Mike looked at the Lucene release notes 
>> and let it stay there. So I was wondering if it’s important/reasonable 
>> enough to highlight in the release notes.
>> 
>> -Anshum
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:12 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com 
>>> <mailto:joels...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I would also consider changing the order of the list to highlight the most 
>>> interesting features.
>>> 
>>> If I saw this as the top highlight I would think of this is mainly a 
>>> maintenance release. 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
>>>   pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML format.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Joel Bernstein
>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ <http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/>
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com 
>>> <mailto:joels...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> I just made the edit.
>>> 
>>> Joel Bernstein
>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ <http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/>
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com 
>>> <mailto:joels...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> For streaming expressions let's go with:
>>> 
>>> Solr 7 Streaming Expressions adds a new statistical programming syntax for
>>> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
>>> graph result sets.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Joel Bernstein
>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ <http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/>
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) 
>>> <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net <mailto:cpoersc...@bloomberg.net>> wrote:
>>> Cool. How about 7th and 8th bullet points like this. 8th bullet ending in 
>>> Java 9 future magic still, not that the magic counts but fitting things on 
>>> roughly a screen full for folks to easily get the gist of the new release 
>>> is important I think.
>>> 
>>> -Christine
>>> 
>>> * Solr 7 adds Streaming Expressions, a new statistical programming syntax 
>>> for
>>>   the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
>>>   graph result sets.
>>> 
>>> * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9
>>> 
>>> From: dev@lucene.apache.org <mailto:dev@lucene.apache.org> At: 09/20/17 
>>> 15:54:54
>>> To:  Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON )  
>>> <mailto:cpoersc...@bloomberg.net>,  dev@lucene.apache.org 
>>> <mailto:dev@lucene.apache.org>
>>> 
>>> Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts
>>> This

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Joel Bernstein]

I'm happy to include Java 9.0 in the release highlights.

Anshum, is that what you were asking about? (Do you mean to remove the note
about upgrading completely)

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

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 12:16 PM, Uwe Schindler <u...@thetaphi.de> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> the reason to mention it is mainly: Java 9 comes out tomorrow! So it’s
> important in that sense. The Java world is looking at the release of Java 9
> tomorrow, so if we have our own release at the start – just in time, I’d
> make the link explicit. So I’d also hurry up with the release so it comes
> out today and not tomorrow, Sept 21.
>
>
>
> On top of this, upgrading to Java 9 is recommended, because there should
> be significant speed improvements when using MMapDircetory (default) and
> DocValues (as it eliminates lots of bounds checks during optimization). Of
> course, this depends on your usage of Solr/Lucene.
>
>
>
> Uwe
>
>
>
> -
>
> Uwe Schindler
>
> Achterdiek 19
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=Achterdiek+19=gmail=g>, D-28357
> Bremen
>
> http://www.thetaphi.de
>
> eMail: u...@thetaphi.de
>
>
>
> *From:* ansh...@apple.com [mailto:ansh...@apple.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 20, 2017 5:20 PM
>
> *To:* dev@lucene.apache.org
> *Subject:* Re: Release 7.0 process starts
>
>
>
> Sounds good.
>
>
>
> Also, I am not a java expert like Uwe, and a few others here so let me
> know if we should leave in the ‘Jigsaw’ part.
>
>
>
> David, you added that yesterday and Mike looked at the Lucene release
> notes and let it stay there. So I was wondering if it’s
> important/reasonable enough to highlight in the release notes.
>
>
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:12 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> I would also consider changing the order of the list to highlight the most
> interesting features.
>
>
>
> If I saw this as the top highlight I would think of this is mainly a
> maintenance release.
>
>
>
>
>
> Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
>
>   pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML format.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Joel Bernstein
>
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> I just made the edit.
>
>
> Joel Bernstein
>
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> For streaming expressions let's go with:
>
>
>
> Solr 7 Streaming Expressions adds a new statistical programming syntax for
>
> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
>
> graph result sets.
>
>
>
>
> Joel Bernstein
>
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) <
> cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
>
> Cool. How about 7th and 8th bullet points like this. 8th bullet ending in
> Java 9 future magic still, not that the magic counts but fitting things on
> roughly a screen full for folks to easily get the gist of the new release
> is important I think.
>
>
>
> -Christine
>
>
>
> * Solr 7 adds Streaming Expressions, a new statistical programming syntax
> for
>
> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
>
> graph result sets.
>
>
>
> * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9
>
>
>
> From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 09/20/17 15:54:54
>
> To: Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON ) <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net>,
> dev@lucene.apache.org
>
>
> Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts
>
> This looks good, other than the wt=xml correction in #1, as Varun pointed
> out. Also, I really think we should highlight streaming expressions (Math
> Engine) even if that means we don’t hit the ‘7 points’ mark :).
>
>
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sep 20, 2017, at 7:21 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) <
> cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> Totally agree with choosing _7_ highlights for the Solr _7_ release!
>
>
>
> Below is the revised draft I came up with:
>
>
>
> (Notice that v2 is the 2nd bullet, though I think it yet needs to mention
> one or _two_ benefits of using the new API especially since we mention that
> /solr/ continues to work.)
>
>
>
> (Also notice some re-ordering of the bullets starting with the
> used-by-many JSON 

RE: Release 7.0 process starts

[Uwe Schindler]

Hi,

 

the reason to mention it is mainly: Java 9 comes out tomorrow! So it’s 
important in that sense. The Java world is looking at the release of Java 9 
tomorrow, so if we have our own release at the start – just in time, I’d make 
the link explicit. So I’d also hurry up with the release so it comes out today 
and not tomorrow, Sept 21.

 

On top of this, upgrading to Java 9 is recommended, because there should be 
significant speed improvements when using MMapDircetory (default) and DocValues 
(as it eliminates lots of bounds checks during optimization). Of course, this 
depends on your usage of Solr/Lucene.

 

Uwe

 

-

Uwe Schindler

Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen

http://www.thetaphi.de <http://www.thetaphi.de/> 

eMail: u...@thetaphi.de

 

From: ansh...@apple.com [mailto:ansh...@apple.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2017 5:20 PM
To: dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts

 

Sounds good.

 

Also, I am not a java expert like Uwe, and a few others here so let me know if 
we should leave in the ‘Jigsaw’ part.

 

David, you added that yesterday and Mike looked at the Lucene release notes and 
let it stay there. So I was wondering if it’s important/reasonable enough to 
highlight in the release notes.

 

-Anshum

 

 

 

On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:12 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com 
<mailto:joels...@gmail.com> > wrote:

 

I would also consider changing the order of the list to highlight the most 
interesting features.

 

If I saw this as the top highlight I would think of this is mainly a 
maintenance release. 

 

 

Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
  pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML format.

 

 




Joel Bernstein

http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

 

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com 
<mailto:joels...@gmail.com> > wrote:

I just made the edit.




Joel Bernstein

http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

 

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com 
<mailto:joels...@gmail.com> > wrote:

For streaming expressions let's go with:

 

Solr 7 Streaming Expressions adds a new statistical programming syntax for

the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and

graph result sets.

 




Joel Bernstein

http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/

 

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) 
<cpoersc...@bloomberg.net <mailto:cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> > wrote:

Cool. How about 7th and 8th bullet points like this. 8th bullet ending in Java 
9 future magic still, not that the magic counts but fitting things on roughly a 
screen full for folks to easily get the gist of the new release is important I 
think.

 

-Christine

 

* Solr 7 adds Streaming Expressions, a new statistical programming syntax for

the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and

graph result sets.

 

* Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9

 

From: dev@lucene.apache.org <mailto:dev@lucene.apache.org>  At: 09/20/17 
15:54:54

To: Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON )  <mailto:cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> 
, dev@lucene.apache.org <mailto:dev@lucene.apache.org> 


Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts

This looks good, other than the wt=xml correction in #1, as Varun pointed out. 
Also, I really think we should highlight streaming expressions (Math Engine) 
even if that means we don’t hit the ‘7 points’ mark :).

 

-Anshum

 

 

 

On Sep 20, 2017, at 7:21 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) 
<cpoersc...@bloomberg.net <mailto:cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> > wrote:

 

Totally agree with choosing _7_ highlights for the Solr _7_ release!

 

Below is the revised draft I came up with:

 

(Notice that v2 is the 2nd bullet, though I think it yet needs to mention one 
or _two_ benefits of using the new API especially since we mention that /solr/ 
continues to work.)

 

(Also notice some re-ordering of the bullets starting with the used-by-many 
JSON first, then v2 API second, then third collection creation which mentions 
faceting and so leads over to the fourth bullet re: facet refinement. Fifth is 
the new replica types (that bullet being slightly longer than the others to 
explain what the types are about). Sixth is auto-scaling which mentions future 
releases (would folks use new replica types first before moving on to 
auto-scaling?). Seventh and last then is Solr _7_ mention with Java _9_ i.e. 
the just-arrived future again there.)

 

Solr 7.0 Release Highlights:

 

* Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,

pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML format.

 

* The new v2 API, exposed at /api/ and also supported via SolrJ, is now the

preferred API, but /solr/ continues to work.

 

* A new `_default` configset is used if no config is specified at collection

cr

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Walter Underwood]

I scan it for all big changes, not just features. Is a version of Java dropped 
in this release? That sort of thing should be included.

wunder
Walter Underwood
wun...@wunderwood.org
http://observer.wunderwood.org/  (my blog)


> On Sep 20, 2017, at 9:12 AM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com> wrote:
> 
> Do you mean to remove the note about upgrading completely? Currently it’s 
> just a pointer to the CHANGES and recommends users to go through it before 
> upgrading.
> 
> -Anshum
> 
> 
> 
>> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:34 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com 
>> <mailto:joels...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> I think the release highlights are about what's exciting in the release. So 
>> leading with the most exciting features is the way to go. Informing people 
>> of changes that will affect them can be done in the upgrade notes in 
>> CHANGES.txt.
>> 
>> What do other people think about this?
>> 
>> Joel Bernstein
>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ <http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/>
>> 
>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com 
>> <mailto:ansh...@apple.com>> wrote:
>> Also, I think it might make sense to add a line saying that the Ref Guide 
>> for 7.0 would be released soon.
>> 
>> -Anshum
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:20 AM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com 
>>> <mailto:ansh...@apple.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Sounds good.
>>> 
>>> Also, I am not a java expert like Uwe, and a few others here so let me know 
>>> if we should leave in the ‘Jigsaw’ part.
>>> 
>>> David, you added that yesterday and Mike looked at the Lucene release notes 
>>> and let it stay there. So I was wondering if it’s important/reasonable 
>>> enough to highlight in the release notes.
>>> 
>>> -Anshum
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:12 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com 
>>>> <mailto:joels...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I would also consider changing the order of the list to highlight the most 
>>>> interesting features.
>>>> 
>>>> If I saw this as the top highlight I would think of this is mainly a 
>>>> maintenance release. 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
>>>>   pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML format.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Joel Bernstein
>>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ <http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/>
>>>> 
>>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com 
>>>> <mailto:joels...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> I just made the edit.
>>>> 
>>>> Joel Bernstein
>>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ <http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/>
>>>> 
>>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com 
>>>> <mailto:joels...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> For streaming expressions let's go with:
>>>> 
>>>> Solr 7 Streaming Expressions adds a new statistical programming syntax for
>>>> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
>>>> graph result sets.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Joel Bernstein
>>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ <http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/>
>>>> 
>>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) 
>>>> <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net <mailto:cpoersc...@bloomberg.net>> wrote:
>>>> Cool. How about 7th and 8th bullet points like this. 8th bullet ending in 
>>>> Java 9 future magic still, not that the magic counts but fitting things on 
>>>> roughly a screen full for folks to easily get the gist of the new release 
>>>> is important I think.
>>>> 
>>>> -Christine
>>>> 
>>>> * Solr 7 adds Streaming Expressions, a new statistical programming syntax 
>>>> for
>>>>   the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
>>>>   graph result sets.
>>>> 
>>>> * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9
>>>> 
>>>> From: dev@lucene.apache.org <mailto:dev@lucene.apache.org> At: 09/20/17 
>>>> 15:54:54
>>>> To:  Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON )  

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Anshum Gupta]

Do you mean to remove the note about upgrading completely? Currently it’s just 
a pointer to the CHANGES and recommends users to go through it before upgrading.

-Anshum



> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:34 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I think the release highlights are about what's exciting in the release. So 
> leading with the most exciting features is the way to go. Informing people of 
> changes that will affect them can be done in the upgrade notes in CHANGES.txt.
> 
> What do other people think about this?
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ <http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/>
> 
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com 
> <mailto:ansh...@apple.com>> wrote:
> Also, I think it might make sense to add a line saying that the Ref Guide for 
> 7.0 would be released soon.
> 
> -Anshum
> 
> 
> 
>> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:20 AM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com 
>> <mailto:ansh...@apple.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> Sounds good.
>> 
>> Also, I am not a java expert like Uwe, and a few others here so let me know 
>> if we should leave in the ‘Jigsaw’ part.
>> 
>> David, you added that yesterday and Mike looked at the Lucene release notes 
>> and let it stay there. So I was wondering if it’s important/reasonable 
>> enough to highlight in the release notes.
>> 
>> -Anshum
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:12 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com 
>>> <mailto:joels...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I would also consider changing the order of the list to highlight the most 
>>> interesting features.
>>> 
>>> If I saw this as the top highlight I would think of this is mainly a 
>>> maintenance release. 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
>>>   pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML format.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Joel Bernstein
>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ <http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/>
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com 
>>> <mailto:joels...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> I just made the edit.
>>> 
>>> Joel Bernstein
>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ <http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/>
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com 
>>> <mailto:joels...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> For streaming expressions let's go with:
>>> 
>>> Solr 7 Streaming Expressions adds a new statistical programming syntax for
>>> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
>>> graph result sets.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Joel Bernstein
>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ <http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/>
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) 
>>> <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net <mailto:cpoersc...@bloomberg.net>> wrote:
>>> Cool. How about 7th and 8th bullet points like this. 8th bullet ending in 
>>> Java 9 future magic still, not that the magic counts but fitting things on 
>>> roughly a screen full for folks to easily get the gist of the new release 
>>> is important I think.
>>> 
>>> -Christine
>>> 
>>> * Solr 7 adds Streaming Expressions, a new statistical programming syntax 
>>> for
>>>   the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
>>>   graph result sets.
>>> 
>>> * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9
>>> 
>>> From: dev@lucene.apache.org <mailto:dev@lucene.apache.org> At: 09/20/17 
>>> 15:54:54
>>> To:  Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON )  
>>> <mailto:cpoersc...@bloomberg.net>,  dev@lucene.apache.org 
>>> <mailto:dev@lucene.apache.org>
>>> 
>>> Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts
>>> This looks good, other than the wt=xml correction in #1, as Varun pointed 
>>> out. Also, I really think we should highlight streaming expressions (Math 
>>> Engine) even if that means we don’t hit the ‘7 points’ mark :).
>>> 
>>> -Anshum
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Sep 20, 2017, at 7:21 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) 
>>>> <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net <mailto:cpoersc...@bloomberg.net>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Totally agree with choosing _7_ hi

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Joel Bernstein]

I think the release highlights are about what's exciting in the release. So
leading with the most exciting features is the way to go. Informing people
of changes that will affect them can be done in the upgrade notes in
CHANGES.txt.

What do other people think about this?

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

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com> wrote:

> Also, I think it might make sense to add a line saying that the Ref Guide
> for 7.0 would be released soon.
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:20 AM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com> wrote:
>
> Sounds good.
>
> Also, I am not a java expert like Uwe, and a few others here so let me
> know if we should leave in the ‘Jigsaw’ part.
>
> David, you added that yesterday and Mike looked at the Lucene release
> notes and let it stay there. So I was wondering if it’s
> important/reasonable enough to highlight in the release notes.
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:12 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I would also consider changing the order of the list to highlight the most
> interesting features.
>
> If I saw this as the top highlight I would think of this is mainly a
> maintenance release.
>
>
> Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,  pass wt=json 
> and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML format.
>
>
>
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I just made the edit.
>>
>> Joel Bernstein
>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> For streaming expressions let's go with:
>>>
>>> Solr 7 Streaming Expressions adds a new statistical programming syntax
>>> for
>>> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
>>> graph result sets.
>>>
>>>
>>> Joel Bernstein
>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/
>>> LONDON) <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Cool. How about 7th and 8th bullet points like this. 8th bullet ending
>>>> in Java 9 future magic still, not that the magic counts but fitting things
>>>> on roughly a screen full for folks to easily get the gist of the new
>>>> release is important I think.
>>>>
>>>> -Christine
>>>>
>>>> * Solr 7 adds Streaming Expressions, a new statistical programming
>>>> syntax for
>>>> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
>>>> graph result sets.
>>>>
>>>> * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9
>>>>
>>>> From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 09/20/17 15:54:54
>>>> To: Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON ) <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net>,
>>>> dev@lucene.apache.org
>>>>
>>>> Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts
>>>>
>>>> This looks good, other than the wt=xml correction in #1, as Varun
>>>> pointed out. Also, I really think we should highlight streaming expressions
>>>> (Math Engine) even if that means we don’t hit the ‘7 points’ mark :).
>>>>
>>>> -Anshum
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sep 20, 2017, at 7:21 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) <
>>>> cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Totally agree with choosing _7_ highlights for the Solr _7_ release!
>>>>
>>>> Below is the revised draft I came up with:
>>>>
>>>> (Notice that v2 is the 2nd bullet, though I think it yet needs to
>>>> mention one or _two_ benefits of using the new API especially since we
>>>> mention that /solr/ continues to work.)
>>>>
>>>> (Also notice some re-ordering of the bullets starting with the
>>>> used-by-many JSON first, then v2 API second, then third collection creation
>>>> which mentions faceting and so leads over to the fourth bullet re: facet
>>>> refinement. Fifth is the new replica types (that bullet being slightly
>>>> longer than the others to explain what the types are about). Sixth is
>>>> auto-scaling which mentions future releases (would folks use new replica
>>>> types first before moving on to auto-scaling?). Seventh and last

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Anshum Gupta]

Also, I think it might make sense to add a line saying that the Ref Guide for 
7.0 would be released soon.

-Anshum



> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:20 AM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com> wrote:
> 
> Sounds good.
> 
> Also, I am not a java expert like Uwe, and a few others here so let me know 
> if we should leave in the ‘Jigsaw’ part.
> 
> David, you added that yesterday and Mike looked at the Lucene release notes 
> and let it stay there. So I was wondering if it’s important/reasonable enough 
> to highlight in the release notes.
> 
> -Anshum
> 
> 
> 
>> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:12 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com 
>> <mailto:joels...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> I would also consider changing the order of the list to highlight the most 
>> interesting features.
>> 
>> If I saw this as the top highlight I would think of this is mainly a 
>> maintenance release. 
>> 
>> 
>> Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
>>   pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML format.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Joel Bernstein
>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ <http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/>
>> 
>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com 
>> <mailto:joels...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> I just made the edit.
>> 
>> Joel Bernstein
>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ <http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/>
>> 
>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com 
>> <mailto:joels...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> For streaming expressions let's go with:
>> 
>> Solr 7 Streaming Expressions adds a new statistical programming syntax for
>> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
>> graph result sets.
>> 
>> 
>> Joel Bernstein
>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ <http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/>
>> 
>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) 
>> <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net <mailto:cpoersc...@bloomberg.net>> wrote:
>> Cool. How about 7th and 8th bullet points like this. 8th bullet ending in 
>> Java 9 future magic still, not that the magic counts but fitting things on 
>> roughly a screen full for folks to easily get the gist of the new release is 
>> important I think.
>> 
>> -Christine
>> 
>> * Solr 7 adds Streaming Expressions, a new statistical programming syntax for
>>   the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
>>   graph result sets.
>> 
>> * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9
>> 
>> From: dev@lucene.apache.org <mailto:dev@lucene.apache.org> At: 09/20/17 
>> 15:54:54
>> To:  Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON )  
>> <mailto:cpoersc...@bloomberg.net>,  dev@lucene.apache.org 
>> <mailto:dev@lucene.apache.org>
>> 
>> Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts
>> This looks good, other than the wt=xml correction in #1, as Varun pointed 
>> out. Also, I really think we should highlight streaming expressions (Math 
>> Engine) even if that means we don’t hit the ‘7 points’ mark :).
>> 
>> -Anshum
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Sep 20, 2017, at 7:21 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) 
>>> <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net <mailto:cpoersc...@bloomberg.net>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Totally agree with choosing _7_ highlights for the Solr _7_ release!
>>> 
>>> Below is the revised draft I came up with:
>>> 
>>> (Notice that v2 is the 2nd bullet, though I think it yet needs to mention 
>>> one or _two_ benefits of using the new API especially since we mention that 
>>> /solr/ continues to work.)
>>> 
>>> (Also notice some re-ordering of the bullets starting with the used-by-many 
>>> JSON first, then v2 API second, then third collection creation which 
>>> mentions faceting and so leads over to the fourth bullet re: facet 
>>> refinement. Fifth is the new replica types (that bullet being slightly 
>>> longer than the others to explain what the types are about). Sixth is 
>>> auto-scaling which mentions future releases (would folks use new replica 
>>> types first before moving on to auto-scaling?). Seventh and last then is 
>>> Solr _7_ mention with Java _9_ i.e. the just-arrived future again there.)
>>> 
>>> Solr 7.0 Release Highlights:
>>> 
>>> * Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
>>>   pass wt=json and/or indent=of

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Joel Bernstein]

This is how I would list things:

* Replica Types - Solr 7 supports different replica types, which
handle updates  differently. In addition to pure NRT operation where
all replicas build an  index and keep a replication log, you can now
also add so called PULL  replicas, achieving the read-speed optimized
benefits of a master/slave  setup while at the same time keeping index
redundancy.* Auto-scaling. Solr can now allocate new replicas to nodes
using a new auto  scaling policy framework. This framework will in
future releases enable Solr  to move shards around based on load, disk
etc.

* The JSON Facet API now supports two-phase facet refinement to ensure
accurate  counts and statistics for facet buckets returned in
distributed mode.
* Streaming Expressions adds a new statistical programming syntax for
the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series
and  graph result sets.

* Analytics Component2 Note

* The new v2 API, exposed at /api/ and also supported via SolrJ, is
now the preferred
API, but /solr/ continues to work.

* Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,  pass
wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML format.





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

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I would also consider changing the order of the list to highlight the most
> interesting features.
>
> If I saw this as the top highlight I would think of this is mainly a
> maintenance release.
>
>
> Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,  pass wt=json 
> and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML format.
>
>
>
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I just made the edit.
>>
>> Joel Bernstein
>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> For streaming expressions let's go with:
>>>
>>> Solr 7 Streaming Expressions adds a new statistical programming syntax
>>> for
>>> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
>>> graph result sets.
>>>
>>>
>>> Joel Bernstein
>>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/
>>> LONDON) <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Cool. How about 7th and 8th bullet points like this. 8th bullet ending
>>>> in Java 9 future magic still, not that the magic counts but fitting things
>>>> on roughly a screen full for folks to easily get the gist of the new
>>>> release is important I think.
>>>>
>>>> -Christine
>>>>
>>>> * Solr 7 adds Streaming Expressions, a new statistical programming
>>>> syntax for
>>>> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
>>>> graph result sets.
>>>>
>>>> * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9
>>>>
>>>> From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 09/20/17 15:54:54
>>>> To: Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON ) <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net>,
>>>> dev@lucene.apache.org
>>>>
>>>> Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts
>>>>
>>>> This looks good, other than the wt=xml correction in #1, as Varun
>>>> pointed out. Also, I really think we should highlight streaming expressions
>>>> (Math Engine) even if that means we don’t hit the ‘7 points’ mark :).
>>>>
>>>> -Anshum
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sep 20, 2017, at 7:21 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) <
>>>> cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Totally agree with choosing _7_ highlights for the Solr _7_ release!
>>>>
>>>> Below is the revised draft I came up with:
>>>>
>>>> (Notice that v2 is the 2nd bullet, though I think it yet needs to
>>>> mention one or _two_ benefits of using the new API especially since we
>>>> mention that /solr/ continues to work.)
>>>>
>>>> (Also notice some re-ordering of the bullets starting with the
>>>> used-by-many JSON first, then v2 API second, then third collection creation
>>>> which mentions faceting and so leads over to the fourth bullet re: facet
>>>> refinement. Fifth is the new replica types (that bullet being slightly
>>>> longer than

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Anshum Gupta]

Sounds good.

Also, I am not a java expert like Uwe, and a few others here so let me know if 
we should leave in the ‘Jigsaw’ part.

David, you added that yesterday and Mike looked at the Lucene release notes and 
let it stay there. So I was wondering if it’s important/reasonable enough to 
highlight in the release notes.

-Anshum



> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:12 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I would also consider changing the order of the list to highlight the most 
> interesting features.
> 
> If I saw this as the top highlight I would think of this is mainly a 
> maintenance release. 
> 
> 
> Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
>   pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML format.
> 
> 
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ <http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/>
> 
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com 
> <mailto:joels...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> I just made the edit.
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ <http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/>
> 
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com 
> <mailto:joels...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> For streaming expressions let's go with:
> 
> Solr 7 Streaming Expressions adds a new statistical programming syntax for
> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
> graph result sets.
> 
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ <http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/>
> 
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) 
> <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net <mailto:cpoersc...@bloomberg.net>> wrote:
> Cool. How about 7th and 8th bullet points like this. 8th bullet ending in 
> Java 9 future magic still, not that the magic counts but fitting things on 
> roughly a screen full for folks to easily get the gist of the new release is 
> important I think.
> 
> -Christine
> 
> * Solr 7 adds Streaming Expressions, a new statistical programming syntax for
>   the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
>   graph result sets.
> 
> * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9
> 
> From: dev@lucene.apache.org <mailto:dev@lucene.apache.org> At: 09/20/17 
> 15:54:54
> To:  Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON )  
> <mailto:cpoersc...@bloomberg.net>,  dev@lucene.apache.org 
> <mailto:dev@lucene.apache.org>
> 
> Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts
> This looks good, other than the wt=xml correction in #1, as Varun pointed 
> out. Also, I really think we should highlight streaming expressions (Math 
> Engine) even if that means we don’t hit the ‘7 points’ mark :).
> 
> -Anshum
> 
> 
> 
>> On Sep 20, 2017, at 7:21 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) 
>> <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net <mailto:cpoersc...@bloomberg.net>> wrote:
>> 
>> Totally agree with choosing _7_ highlights for the Solr _7_ release!
>> 
>> Below is the revised draft I came up with:
>> 
>> (Notice that v2 is the 2nd bullet, though I think it yet needs to mention 
>> one or _two_ benefits of using the new API especially since we mention that 
>> /solr/ continues to work.)
>> 
>> (Also notice some re-ordering of the bullets starting with the used-by-many 
>> JSON first, then v2 API second, then third collection creation which 
>> mentions faceting and so leads over to the fourth bullet re: facet 
>> refinement. Fifth is the new replica types (that bullet being slightly 
>> longer than the others to explain what the types are about). Sixth is 
>> auto-scaling which mentions future releases (would folks use new replica 
>> types first before moving on to auto-scaling?). Seventh and last then is 
>> Solr _7_ mention with Java _9_ i.e. the just-arrived future again there.)
>> 
>> Solr 7.0 Release Highlights:
>> 
>> * Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
>>   pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML format.
>> 
>> * The new v2 API, exposed at /api/ and also supported via SolrJ, is now the
>>   preferred API, but /solr/ continues to work.
>> 
>> * A new `_default` configset is used if no config is specified at collection
>>   creation. The data-driven functionality of this configset indexes strings 
>> as
>>   analyzed text while at the same time copying to a `*_str` field suitable 
>> for
>>   faceting.
>> 
>> * The JSON Facet API now supports two-phase facet refinement to ensure 
>> accurate
>>   counts and statistics for facet buckets 

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Joel Bernstein]

I would also consider changing the order of the list to highlight the most
interesting features.

If I saw this as the top highlight I would think of this is mainly a
maintenance release.


Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,  pass
wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML format.




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

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I just made the edit.
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> For streaming expressions let's go with:
>>
>> Solr 7 Streaming Expressions adds a new statistical programming syntax for
>> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
>> graph result sets.
>>
>>
>> Joel Bernstein
>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON)
>> <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Cool. How about 7th and 8th bullet points like this. 8th bullet ending
>>> in Java 9 future magic still, not that the magic counts but fitting things
>>> on roughly a screen full for folks to easily get the gist of the new
>>> release is important I think.
>>>
>>> -Christine
>>>
>>> * Solr 7 adds Streaming Expressions, a new statistical programming
>>> syntax for
>>> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
>>> graph result sets.
>>>
>>> * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9
>>>
>>> From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 09/20/17 15:54:54
>>> To: Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON ) <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net>,
>>> dev@lucene.apache.org
>>>
>>> Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts
>>>
>>> This looks good, other than the wt=xml correction in #1, as Varun
>>> pointed out. Also, I really think we should highlight streaming expressions
>>> (Math Engine) even if that means we don’t hit the ‘7 points’ mark :).
>>>
>>> -Anshum
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sep 20, 2017, at 7:21 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) <
>>> cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Totally agree with choosing _7_ highlights for the Solr _7_ release!
>>>
>>> Below is the revised draft I came up with:
>>>
>>> (Notice that v2 is the 2nd bullet, though I think it yet needs to
>>> mention one or _two_ benefits of using the new API especially since we
>>> mention that /solr/ continues to work.)
>>>
>>> (Also notice some re-ordering of the bullets starting with the
>>> used-by-many JSON first, then v2 API second, then third collection creation
>>> which mentions faceting and so leads over to the fourth bullet re: facet
>>> refinement. Fifth is the new replica types (that bullet being slightly
>>> longer than the others to explain what the types are about). Sixth is
>>> auto-scaling which mentions future releases (would folks use new replica
>>> types first before moving on to auto-scaling?). Seventh and last then is
>>> Solr _7_ mention with Java _9_ i.e. the just-arrived future again there.)
>>>
>>> Solr 7.0 Release Highlights:
>>>
>>> * Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
>>> pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML format.
>>>
>>> * The new v2 API, exposed at /api/ and also supported via SolrJ, is now
>>> the
>>> preferred API, but /solr/ continues to work.
>>>
>>> * A new `_default` configset is used if no config is specified at
>>> collection
>>> creation. The data-driven functionality of this configset indexes
>>> strings as
>>> analyzed text while at the same time copying to a `*_str` field suitable
>>> for
>>> faceting.
>>>
>>> * The JSON Facet API now supports two-phase facet refinement to ensure
>>> accurate
>>> counts and statistics for facet buckets returned in distributed mode.
>>>
>>> * Replica Types - Solr 7 supports different replica types, which handle
>>> updates
>>> differently. In addition to pure NRT operation where all replicas build
>>> an
>>> index and keep a replication log, you can now also add so called PULL
>>> replicas, achieving the read-speed optimized benefits of a master/slave
>>> setup while at the same tim

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Joel Bernstein]

I just made the edit.

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

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> wrote:

> For streaming expressions let's go with:
>
> Solr 7 Streaming Expressions adds a new statistical programming syntax for
> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
> graph result sets.
>
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON)
> <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
>
>> Cool. How about 7th and 8th bullet points like this. 8th bullet ending
>> in Java 9 future magic still, not that the magic counts but fitting things
>> on roughly a screen full for folks to easily get the gist of the new
>> release is important I think.
>>
>> -Christine
>>
>> * Solr 7 adds Streaming Expressions, a new statistical programming syntax
>> for
>> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
>> graph result sets.
>>
>> * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9
>>
>> From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 09/20/17 15:54:54
>> To: Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON ) <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net>,
>> dev@lucene.apache.org
>>
>> Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts
>>
>> This looks good, other than the wt=xml correction in #1, as Varun pointed
>> out. Also, I really think we should highlight streaming expressions (Math
>> Engine) even if that means we don’t hit the ‘7 points’ mark :).
>>
>> -Anshum
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sep 20, 2017, at 7:21 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) <
>> cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
>>
>> Totally agree with choosing _7_ highlights for the Solr _7_ release!
>>
>> Below is the revised draft I came up with:
>>
>> (Notice that v2 is the 2nd bullet, though I think it yet needs to mention
>> one or _two_ benefits of using the new API especially since we mention that
>> /solr/ continues to work.)
>>
>> (Also notice some re-ordering of the bullets starting with the
>> used-by-many JSON first, then v2 API second, then third collection creation
>> which mentions faceting and so leads over to the fourth bullet re: facet
>> refinement. Fifth is the new replica types (that bullet being slightly
>> longer than the others to explain what the types are about). Sixth is
>> auto-scaling which mentions future releases (would folks use new replica
>> types first before moving on to auto-scaling?). Seventh and last then is
>> Solr _7_ mention with Java _9_ i.e. the just-arrived future again there.)
>>
>> Solr 7.0 Release Highlights:
>>
>> * Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
>> pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML format.
>>
>> * The new v2 API, exposed at /api/ and also supported via SolrJ, is now
>> the
>> preferred API, but /solr/ continues to work.
>>
>> * A new `_default` configset is used if no config is specified at
>> collection
>> creation. The data-driven functionality of this configset indexes strings
>> as
>> analyzed text while at the same time copying to a `*_str` field suitable
>> for
>> faceting.
>>
>> * The JSON Facet API now supports two-phase facet refinement to ensure
>> accurate
>> counts and statistics for facet buckets returned in distributed mode.
>>
>> * Replica Types - Solr 7 supports different replica types, which handle
>> updates
>> differently. In addition to pure NRT operation where all replicas build an
>> index and keep a replication log, you can now also add so called PULL
>> replicas, achieving the read-speed optimized benefits of a master/slave
>> setup while at the same time keeping index redundancy.
>>
>> * Auto-scaling. Solr can now allocate new replicas to nodes using a new
>> auto
>> scaling policy framework. This framework will in future releases enable
>> Solr
>> to move shards around based on load, disk etc.
>>
>> * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9.
>>
>> From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 09/20/17 15:02:38
>> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 9:16 AM Jan Høydahl <jan@cominvent.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> And please, I was serious about choosing 7 major features and not adding
>>> random single improvements. The list has already creeped from 7 to 9
>>> bullets. If you want to add something, then ask youself which of the other
>>> bullets that are less important to MOST USERS and then replace that bullet
>>> instead of adding more. Agree?
>>>
>>
>> I agree with that very much!  *Each bullet added de-values the list as a
>> whole.  *IMO the Java 9 bullet can be removed (too few are even using it
>> yet) and we get to 8 bullets; and those 8 are pretty good.
>> --
>> Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
>> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book:
>> http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON)]

Sure.

Joel, could you edit directly in the WIKI? (I'm about to go into a meeting.)

Thanks!

Christine

From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 09/20/17 16:07:11To:  Christine Poerschke 
(BLOOMBERG/ LONDON ) ,  dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts

For streaming expressions let's go with:

Solr 7 Streaming Expressions adds a new statistical programming syntax for
the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
graph result sets.


Joel Bernstein
http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
 
On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) 
<cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:

Cool. How about 7th and 8th bullet points like this. 8th bullet ending in Java 
9 future magic still, not that the magic counts but fitting things on roughly a 
screen full for folks to easily get the gist of the new release is important I 
think.

-Christine

* Solr 7 adds Streaming Expressions, a new statistical programming syntax for
  the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
  graph result sets.

* Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9

From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 09/20/17 15:54:54To:  Christine Poerschke 
(BLOOMBERG/ LONDON ) ,  dev@lucene.apache.org

Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts

This looks good, other than the wt=xml correction in #1, as Varun pointed out. 
Also, I really think we should highlight streaming expressions (Math Engine) 
even if that means we don’t hit the ‘7 points’ mark :).

-Anshum


 

On Sep 20, 2017, at 7:21 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) 
<cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
Totally agree with choosing _7_ highlights for the Solr _7_ release!

Below is the revised draft I came up with:

(Notice that v2 is the 2nd bullet, though I think it yet needs to mention one 
or _two_ benefits of using the new API especially since we mention that /solr/ 
continues to work.)

(Also notice some re-ordering of the bullets starting with the used-by-many 
JSON first, then v2 API second, then third collection creation which mentions 
faceting and so leads over to the fourth bullet re: facet refinement. Fifth is 
the new replica types (that bullet being slightly longer than the others to 
explain what the types are about). Sixth is auto-scaling which mentions future 
releases (would folks use new replica types first before moving on to 
auto-scaling?). Seventh and last then is Solr _7_ mention with Java _9_ i.e. 
the just-arrived future again there.)

Solr 7.0 Release Highlights:

* Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
  pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML format.

* The new v2 API, exposed at /api/ and also supported via SolrJ, is now the
  preferred API, but /solr/ continues to work.

* A new `_default` configset is used if no config is specified at collection
  creation. The data-driven functionality of this configset indexes strings as
  analyzed text while at the same time copying to a `*_str` field suitable for
  faceting.

* The JSON Facet API now supports two-phase facet refinement to ensure accurate
  counts and statistics for facet buckets returned in distributed mode.

* Replica Types - Solr 7 supports different replica types, which handle updates
  differently. In addition to pure NRT operation where all replicas build an
  index and keep a replication log, you can now also add so called PULL
  replicas, achieving the read-speed optimized benefits of a master/slave
  setup while at the same time keeping index redundancy.

* Auto-scaling. Solr can now allocate new replicas to nodes using a new auto
  scaling policy framework. This framework will in future releases enable Solr
  to move shards around based on load, disk etc.

* Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9.

From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 09/20/17 15:02:38To:  dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts


On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 9:16 AM Jan Høydahl <jan@cominvent.com> wrote:
And please, I was serious about choosing 7 major features and not adding random 
single improvements. The list has already creeped from 7 to 9 bullets. If you 
want to add something, then ask youself which of the other bullets that are 
less important to MOST USERS and then replace that bullet instead of adding 
more. Agree?

I agree with that very much!  Each bullet added de-values the list as a whole.  
IMO the Java 9 bullet can be removed (too few are even using it yet) and we get 
to 8 bullets; and those 8 are pretty good. 
-- 
Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: 
http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Joel Bernstein]

For streaming expressions let's go with:

Solr 7 Streaming Expressions adds a new statistical programming syntax for
the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
graph result sets.


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

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) <
cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:

> Cool. How about 7th and 8th bullet points like this. 8th bullet ending in
> Java 9 future magic still, not that the magic counts but fitting things on
> roughly a screen full for folks to easily get the gist of the new release
> is important I think.
>
> -Christine
>
> * Solr 7 adds Streaming Expressions, a new statistical programming syntax
> for
> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
> graph result sets.
>
> * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9
>
> From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 09/20/17 15:54:54
> To: Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON ) <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net>,
> dev@lucene.apache.org
>
> Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts
>
> This looks good, other than the wt=xml correction in #1, as Varun pointed
> out. Also, I really think we should highlight streaming expressions (Math
> Engine) even if that means we don’t hit the ‘7 points’ mark :).
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
> On Sep 20, 2017, at 7:21 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) <
> cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
>
> Totally agree with choosing _7_ highlights for the Solr _7_ release!
>
> Below is the revised draft I came up with:
>
> (Notice that v2 is the 2nd bullet, though I think it yet needs to mention
> one or _two_ benefits of using the new API especially since we mention that
> /solr/ continues to work.)
>
> (Also notice some re-ordering of the bullets starting with the
> used-by-many JSON first, then v2 API second, then third collection creation
> which mentions faceting and so leads over to the fourth bullet re: facet
> refinement. Fifth is the new replica types (that bullet being slightly
> longer than the others to explain what the types are about). Sixth is
> auto-scaling which mentions future releases (would folks use new replica
> types first before moving on to auto-scaling?). Seventh and last then is
> Solr _7_ mention with Java _9_ i.e. the just-arrived future again there.)
>
> Solr 7.0 Release Highlights:
>
> * Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
> pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML format.
>
> * The new v2 API, exposed at /api/ and also supported via SolrJ, is now the
> preferred API, but /solr/ continues to work.
>
> * A new `_default` configset is used if no config is specified at
> collection
> creation. The data-driven functionality of this configset indexes strings
> as
> analyzed text while at the same time copying to a `*_str` field suitable
> for
> faceting.
>
> * The JSON Facet API now supports two-phase facet refinement to ensure
> accurate
> counts and statistics for facet buckets returned in distributed mode.
>
> * Replica Types - Solr 7 supports different replica types, which handle
> updates
> differently. In addition to pure NRT operation where all replicas build an
> index and keep a replication log, you can now also add so called PULL
> replicas, achieving the read-speed optimized benefits of a master/slave
> setup while at the same time keeping index redundancy.
>
> * Auto-scaling. Solr can now allocate new replicas to nodes using a new
> auto
> scaling policy framework. This framework will in future releases enable
> Solr
> to move shards around based on load, disk etc.
>
> * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9.
>
> From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 09/20/17 15:02:38
> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 9:16 AM Jan Høydahl <jan@cominvent.com> wrote:
>
>> And please, I was serious about choosing 7 major features and not adding
>> random single improvements. The list has already creeped from 7 to 9
>> bullets. If you want to add something, then ask youself which of the other
>> bullets that are less important to MOST USERS and then replace that bullet
>> instead of adding more. Agree?
>>
>
> I agree with that very much!  *Each bullet added de-values the list as a
> whole.  *IMO the Java 9 bullet can be removed (too few are even using it
> yet) and we get to 8 bullets; and those 8 are pretty good.
> --
> Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: http://www.
> solrenterprisesearchserver.com
>
>
>

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON)]

Cool. How about 7th and 8th bullet points like this. 8th bullet ending in Java 
9 future magic still, not that the magic counts but fitting things on roughly a 
screen full for folks to easily get the gist of the new release is important I 
think.

-Christine

* Solr 7 adds Streaming Expressions, a new statistical programming syntax for
  the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series and
  graph result sets.

* Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9

From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 09/20/17 15:54:54To:  Christine Poerschke 
(BLOOMBERG/ LONDON ) ,  dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts

This looks good, other than the wt=xml correction in #1, as Varun pointed out. 
Also, I really think we should highlight streaming expressions (Math Engine) 
even if that means we don’t hit the ‘7 points’ mark :).

-Anshum


 

On Sep 20, 2017, at 7:21 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) 
<cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
Totally agree with choosing _7_ highlights for the Solr _7_ release!

Below is the revised draft I came up with:

(Notice that v2 is the 2nd bullet, though I think it yet needs to mention one 
or _two_ benefits of using the new API especially since we mention that /solr/ 
continues to work.)

(Also notice some re-ordering of the bullets starting with the used-by-many 
JSON first, then v2 API second, then third collection creation which mentions 
faceting and so leads over to the fourth bullet re: facet refinement. Fifth is 
the new replica types (that bullet being slightly longer than the others to 
explain what the types are about). Sixth is auto-scaling which mentions future 
releases (would folks use new replica types first before moving on to 
auto-scaling?). Seventh and last then is Solr _7_ mention with Java _9_ i.e. 
the just-arrived future again there.)

Solr 7.0 Release Highlights:

* Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
  pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML format.

* The new v2 API, exposed at /api/ and also supported via SolrJ, is now the
  preferred API, but /solr/ continues to work.

* A new `_default` configset is used if no config is specified at collection
  creation. The data-driven functionality of this configset indexes strings as
  analyzed text while at the same time copying to a `*_str` field suitable for
  faceting.

* The JSON Facet API now supports two-phase facet refinement to ensure accurate
  counts and statistics for facet buckets returned in distributed mode.

* Replica Types - Solr 7 supports different replica types, which handle updates
  differently. In addition to pure NRT operation where all replicas build an
  index and keep a replication log, you can now also add so called PULL
  replicas, achieving the read-speed optimized benefits of a master/slave
  setup while at the same time keeping index redundancy.

* Auto-scaling. Solr can now allocate new replicas to nodes using a new auto
  scaling policy framework. This framework will in future releases enable Solr
  to move shards around based on load, disk etc.

* Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9.

From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 09/20/17 15:02:38To:  dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts


On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 9:16 AM Jan Høydahl <jan@cominvent.com> wrote:
And please, I was serious about choosing 7 major features and not adding random 
single improvements. The list has already creeped from 7 to 9 bullets. If you 
want to add something, then ask youself which of the other bullets that are 
less important to MOST USERS and then replace that bullet instead of adding 
more. Agree?

I agree with that very much!  Each bullet added de-values the list as a whole.  
IMO the Java 9 bullet can be removed (too few are even using it yet) and we get 
to 8 bullets; and those 8 are pretty good. 
-- 
Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: 
http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Anshum Gupta]

Christine, can you update the draft with the changes ?

-Anshum



> On Sep 20, 2017, at 7:54 AM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com> wrote:
> 
> This looks good, other than the wt=xml correction in #1, as Varun pointed 
> out. Also, I really think we should highlight streaming expressions (Math 
> Engine) even if that means we don’t hit the ‘7 points’ mark :).
> 
> -Anshum
> 
> 
> 
>> On Sep 20, 2017, at 7:21 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) 
>> <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net <mailto:cpoersc...@bloomberg.net>> wrote:
>> 
>> Totally agree with choosing _7_ highlights for the Solr _7_ release!
>> 
>> Below is the revised draft I came up with:
>> 
>> (Notice that v2 is the 2nd bullet, though I think it yet needs to mention 
>> one or _two_ benefits of using the new API especially since we mention that 
>> /solr/ continues to work.)
>> 
>> (Also notice some re-ordering of the bullets starting with the used-by-many 
>> JSON first, then v2 API second, then third collection creation which 
>> mentions faceting and so leads over to the fourth bullet re: facet 
>> refinement. Fifth is the new replica types (that bullet being slightly 
>> longer than the others to explain what the types are about). Sixth is 
>> auto-scaling which mentions future releases (would folks use new replica 
>> types first before moving on to auto-scaling?). Seventh and last then is 
>> Solr _7_ mention with Java _9_ i.e. the just-arrived future again there.)
>> 
>> Solr 7.0 Release Highlights:
>> 
>> * Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
>>   pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML format.
>> 
>> * The new v2 API, exposed at /api/ and also supported via SolrJ, is now the
>>   preferred API, but /solr/ continues to work.
>> 
>> * A new `_default` configset is used if no config is specified at collection
>>   creation. The data-driven functionality of this configset indexes strings 
>> as
>>   analyzed text while at the same time copying to a `*_str` field suitable 
>> for
>>   faceting.
>> 
>> * The JSON Facet API now supports two-phase facet refinement to ensure 
>> accurate
>>   counts and statistics for facet buckets returned in distributed mode.
>> 
>> * Replica Types - Solr 7 supports different replica types, which handle 
>> updates
>>   differently. In addition to pure NRT operation where all replicas build an
>>   index and keep a replication log, you can now also add so called PULL
>>   replicas, achieving the read-speed optimized benefits of a master/slave
>>   setup while at the same time keeping index redundancy.
>> 
>> * Auto-scaling. Solr can now allocate new replicas to nodes using a new auto
>>   scaling policy framework. This framework will in future releases enable 
>> Solr
>>   to move shards around based on load, disk etc.
>> 
>> * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9.
>> 
>> From: dev@lucene.apache.org <mailto:dev@lucene.apache.org> At: 09/20/17 
>> 15:02:38
>> To:  dev@lucene.apache.org <mailto:dev@lucene.apache.org>
>> Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 9:16 AM Jan Høydahl <jan@cominvent.com 
>> <mailto:jan@cominvent.com>> wrote:
>> And please, I was serious about choosing 7 major features and not adding 
>> random single improvements. The list has already creeped from 7 to 9 
>> bullets. If you want to add something, then ask youself which of the other 
>> bullets that are less important to MOST USERS and then replace that bullet 
>> instead of adding more. Agree?
>> 
>> I agree with that very much!  Each bullet added de-values the list as a 
>> whole.  IMO the Java 9 bullet can be removed (too few are even using it yet) 
>> and we get to 8 bullets; and those 8 are pretty good. 
>> -- 
>> Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
>> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley 
>> <http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley> | Book: 
>> http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com 
>> <http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com/>

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Anshum Gupta]

This looks good, other than the wt=xml correction in #1, as Varun pointed out. 
Also, I really think we should highlight streaming expressions (Math Engine) 
even if that means we don’t hit the ‘7 points’ mark :).

-Anshum



> On Sep 20, 2017, at 7:21 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) 
> <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
> 
> Totally agree with choosing _7_ highlights for the Solr _7_ release!
> 
> Below is the revised draft I came up with:
> 
> (Notice that v2 is the 2nd bullet, though I think it yet needs to mention one 
> or _two_ benefits of using the new API especially since we mention that 
> /solr/ continues to work.)
> 
> (Also notice some re-ordering of the bullets starting with the used-by-many 
> JSON first, then v2 API second, then third collection creation which mentions 
> faceting and so leads over to the fourth bullet re: facet refinement. Fifth 
> is the new replica types (that bullet being slightly longer than the others 
> to explain what the types are about). Sixth is auto-scaling which mentions 
> future releases (would folks use new replica types first before moving on to 
> auto-scaling?). Seventh and last then is Solr _7_ mention with Java _9_ i.e. 
> the just-arrived future again there.)
> 
> Solr 7.0 Release Highlights:
> 
> * Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
>   pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML format.
> 
> * The new v2 API, exposed at /api/ and also supported via SolrJ, is now the
>   preferred API, but /solr/ continues to work.
> 
> * A new `_default` configset is used if no config is specified at collection
>   creation. The data-driven functionality of this configset indexes strings as
>   analyzed text while at the same time copying to a `*_str` field suitable for
>   faceting.
> 
> * The JSON Facet API now supports two-phase facet refinement to ensure 
> accurate
>   counts and statistics for facet buckets returned in distributed mode.
> 
> * Replica Types - Solr 7 supports different replica types, which handle 
> updates
>   differently. In addition to pure NRT operation where all replicas build an
>   index and keep a replication log, you can now also add so called PULL
>   replicas, achieving the read-speed optimized benefits of a master/slave
>   setup while at the same time keeping index redundancy.
> 
> * Auto-scaling. Solr can now allocate new replicas to nodes using a new auto
>   scaling policy framework. This framework will in future releases enable Solr
>   to move shards around based on load, disk etc.
> 
> * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9.
> 
> From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 09/20/17 15:02:38
> To:  dev@lucene.apache.org <mailto:dev@lucene.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts
> 
> 
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 9:16 AM Jan Høydahl <jan@cominvent.com 
> <mailto:jan@cominvent.com>> wrote:
> And please, I was serious about choosing 7 major features and not adding 
> random single improvements. The list has already creeped from 7 to 9 bullets. 
> If you want to add something, then ask youself which of the other bullets 
> that are less important to MOST USERS and then replace that bullet instead of 
> adding more. Agree?
> 
> I agree with that very much!  Each bullet added de-values the list as a 
> whole.  IMO the Java 9 bullet can be removed (too few are even using it yet) 
> and we get to 8 bullets; and those 8 are pretty good. 
> -- 
> Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley 
> <http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley> | Book: 
> http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com 
> <http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com/>

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Walter Underwood]

I’m fine with more than seven bullet points. In fact, when I see a list of 8 or 
9 things, I know it is a real list, and not someone just trying to get to the 
magic 7 or 10.

wunder
Walter Underwood
wun...@wunderwood.org
http://observer.wunderwood.org/  (my blog)


> On Sep 20, 2017, at 7:39 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I think Solr 7 is a truly exciting release stacked with interesting new 
> features. So let's not drop off anything really interesting just to keep it 
> to 7 bullet points. But we should prune the list to include the high impact 
> features. 
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ <http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/>
> 
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 10:21 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) 
> <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net <mailto:cpoersc...@bloomberg.net>> wrote:
> Totally agree with choosing _7_ highlights for the Solr _7_ release!
> 
> Below is the revised draft I came up with:
> 
> (Notice that v2 is the 2nd bullet, though I think it yet needs to mention one 
> or _two_ benefits of using the new API especially since we mention that 
> /solr/ continues to work.)
> 
> (Also notice some re-ordering of the bullets starting with the used-by-many 
> JSON first, then v2 API second, then third collection creation which mentions 
> faceting and so leads over to the fourth bullet re: facet refinement. Fifth 
> is the new replica types (that bullet being slightly longer than the others 
> to explain what the types are about). Sixth is auto-scaling which mentions 
> future releases (would folks use new replica types first before moving on to 
> auto-scaling?). Seventh and last then is Solr _7_ mention with Java _9_ i.e. 
> the just-arrived future again there.)
> 
> Solr 7.0 Release Highlights:
> 
> * Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
>   pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML format.
> 
> * The new v2 API, exposed at /api/ and also supported via SolrJ, is now the
>   preferred API, but /solr/ continues to work.
> 
> * A new `_default` configset is used if no config is specified at collection
>   creation. The data-driven functionality of this configset indexes strings as
>   analyzed text while at the same time copying to a `*_str` field suitable for
>   faceting.
> 
> * The JSON Facet API now supports two-phase facet refinement to ensure 
> accurate
>   counts and statistics for facet buckets returned in distributed mode.
> 
> * Replica Types - Solr 7 supports different replica types, which handle 
> updates
>   differently. In addition to pure NRT operation where all replicas build an
>   index and keep a replication log, you can now also add so called PULL
>   replicas, achieving the read-speed optimized benefits of a master/slave
>   setup while at the same time keeping index redundancy.
> 
> * Auto-scaling. Solr can now allocate new replicas to nodes using a new auto
>   scaling policy framework. This framework will in future releases enable Solr
>   to move shards around based on load, disk etc.
> 
> * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9.
> 
> From: dev@lucene.apache.org <mailto:dev@lucene.apache.org> At: 09/20/17 
> 15:02:38
> To:  dev@lucene.apache.org <mailto:dev@lucene.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts
> 
> 
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 9:16 AM Jan Høydahl <jan@cominvent.com 
> <mailto:jan@cominvent.com>> wrote:
> And please, I was serious about choosing 7 major features and not adding 
> random single improvements. The list has already creeped from 7 to 9 bullets. 
> If you want to add something, then ask youself which of the other bullets 
> that are less important to MOST USERS and then replace that bullet instead of 
> adding more. Agree?
> 
> I agree with that very much!  Each bullet added de-values the list as a 
> whole.  IMO the Java 9 bullet can be removed (too few are even using it yet) 
> and we get to 8 bullets; and those 8 are pretty good. 
> -- 
> Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley 
> <http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley> | Book: 
> http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com 
> <http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com/>

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Varun Thacker]

"pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML format"
: Should it be pass wt=xml or am I misunderstanding this statement ?

Additionally should we add a bullet regarding point fields ?

* Numeric and date data use point field types by default. All trie fields
types have been deprecated

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 7:21 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) <
cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:

> Totally agree with choosing _7_ highlights for the Solr _7_ release!
>
> Below is the revised draft I came up with:
>
> (Notice that v2 is the 2nd bullet, though I think it yet needs to mention
> one or _two_ benefits of using the new API especially since we mention that
> /solr/ continues to work.)
>
> (Also notice some re-ordering of the bullets starting with the
> used-by-many JSON first, then v2 API second, then third collection creation
> which mentions faceting and so leads over to the fourth bullet re: facet
> refinement. Fifth is the new replica types (that bullet being slightly
> longer than the others to explain what the types are about). Sixth is
> auto-scaling which mentions future releases (would folks use new replica
> types first before moving on to auto-scaling?). Seventh and last then is
> Solr _7_ mention with Java _9_ i.e. the just-arrived future again there.)
>
> Solr 7.0 Release Highlights:
>
> * Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
> pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML format.
>
> * The new v2 API, exposed at /api/ and also supported via SolrJ, is now the
> preferred API, but /solr/ continues to work.
>
> * A new `_default` configset is used if no config is specified at
> collection
> creation. The data-driven functionality of this configset indexes strings
> as
> analyzed text while at the same time copying to a `*_str` field suitable
> for
> faceting.
>
> * The JSON Facet API now supports two-phase facet refinement to ensure
> accurate
> counts and statistics for facet buckets returned in distributed mode.
>
> * Replica Types - Solr 7 supports different replica types, which handle
> updates
> differently. In addition to pure NRT operation where all replicas build an
> index and keep a replication log, you can now also add so called PULL
> replicas, achieving the read-speed optimized benefits of a master/slave
> setup while at the same time keeping index redundancy.
>
> * Auto-scaling. Solr can now allocate new replicas to nodes using a new
> auto
> scaling policy framework. This framework will in future releases enable
> Solr
> to move shards around based on load, disk etc.
>
> * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9.
>
> From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 09/20/17 15:02:38
> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 9:16 AM Jan Høydahl <jan@cominvent.com> wrote:
>
>> And please, I was serious about choosing 7 major features and not adding
>> random single improvements. The list has already creeped from 7 to 9
>> bullets. If you want to add something, then ask youself which of the other
>> bullets that are less important to MOST USERS and then replace that bullet
>> instead of adding more. Agree?
>>
>
> I agree with that very much!  *Each bullet added de-values the list as a
> whole.  *IMO the Java 9 bullet can be removed (too few are even using it
> yet) and we get to 8 bullets; and those 8 are pretty good.
> --
> Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: http://www.
> solrenterprisesearchserver.com
>
>

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Joel Bernstein]

I think Solr 7 is a truly exciting release stacked with interesting new
features. So let's not drop off anything really interesting just to keep it
to 7 bullet points. But we should prune the list to include the high impact
features.

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

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 10:21 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) <
cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote:

> Totally agree with choosing _7_ highlights for the Solr _7_ release!
>
> Below is the revised draft I came up with:
>
> (Notice that v2 is the 2nd bullet, though I think it yet needs to mention
> one or _two_ benefits of using the new API especially since we mention that
> /solr/ continues to work.)
>
> (Also notice some re-ordering of the bullets starting with the
> used-by-many JSON first, then v2 API second, then third collection creation
> which mentions faceting and so leads over to the fourth bullet re: facet
> refinement. Fifth is the new replica types (that bullet being slightly
> longer than the others to explain what the types are about). Sixth is
> auto-scaling which mentions future releases (would folks use new replica
> types first before moving on to auto-scaling?). Seventh and last then is
> Solr _7_ mention with Java _9_ i.e. the just-arrived future again there.)
>
> Solr 7.0 Release Highlights:
>
> * Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
> pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML format.
>
> * The new v2 API, exposed at /api/ and also supported via SolrJ, is now the
> preferred API, but /solr/ continues to work.
>
> * A new `_default` configset is used if no config is specified at
> collection
> creation. The data-driven functionality of this configset indexes strings
> as
> analyzed text while at the same time copying to a `*_str` field suitable
> for
> faceting.
>
> * The JSON Facet API now supports two-phase facet refinement to ensure
> accurate
> counts and statistics for facet buckets returned in distributed mode.
>
> * Replica Types - Solr 7 supports different replica types, which handle
> updates
> differently. In addition to pure NRT operation where all replicas build an
> index and keep a replication log, you can now also add so called PULL
> replicas, achieving the read-speed optimized benefits of a master/slave
> setup while at the same time keeping index redundancy.
>
> * Auto-scaling. Solr can now allocate new replicas to nodes using a new
> auto
> scaling policy framework. This framework will in future releases enable
> Solr
> to move shards around based on load, disk etc.
>
> * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9.
>
> From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 09/20/17 15:02:38
> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 9:16 AM Jan Høydahl <jan@cominvent.com> wrote:
>
>> And please, I was serious about choosing 7 major features and not adding
>> random single improvements. The list has already creeped from 7 to 9
>> bullets. If you want to add something, then ask youself which of the other
>> bullets that are less important to MOST USERS and then replace that bullet
>> instead of adding more. Agree?
>>
>
> I agree with that very much!  *Each bullet added de-values the list as a
> whole.  *IMO the Java 9 bullet can be removed (too few are even using it
> yet) and we get to 8 bullets; and those 8 are pretty good.
> --
> Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: http://www.
> solrenterprisesearchserver.com
>
>

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON)]

Totally agree with choosing _7_ highlights for the Solr _7_ release!

Below is the revised draft I came up with:

(Notice that v2 is the 2nd bullet, though I think it yet needs to mention one 
or _two_ benefits of using the new API especially since we mention that /solr/ 
continues to work.)

(Also notice some re-ordering of the bullets starting with the used-by-many 
JSON first, then v2 API second, then third collection creation which mentions 
faceting and so leads over to the fourth bullet re: facet refinement. Fifth is 
the new replica types (that bullet being slightly longer than the others to 
explain what the types are about). Sixth is auto-scaling which mentions future 
releases (would folks use new replica types first before moving on to 
auto-scaling?). Seventh and last then is Solr _7_ mention with Java _9_ i.e. 
the just-arrived future again there.)

Solr 7.0 Release Highlights:

* Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
  pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML format.

* The new v2 API, exposed at /api/ and also supported via SolrJ, is now the
  preferred API, but /solr/ continues to work.

* A new `_default` configset is used if no config is specified at collection
  creation. The data-driven functionality of this configset indexes strings as
  analyzed text while at the same time copying to a `*_str` field suitable for
  faceting.

* The JSON Facet API now supports two-phase facet refinement to ensure accurate
  counts and statistics for facet buckets returned in distributed mode.

* Replica Types - Solr 7 supports different replica types, which handle updates
  differently. In addition to pure NRT operation where all replicas build an
  index and keep a replication log, you can now also add so called PULL
  replicas, achieving the read-speed optimized benefits of a master/slave
  setup while at the same time keeping index redundancy.

* Auto-scaling. Solr can now allocate new replicas to nodes using a new auto
  scaling policy framework. This framework will in future releases enable Solr
  to move shards around based on load, disk etc.

* Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9.

From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 09/20/17 15:02:38To:  dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts


On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 9:16 AM Jan Høydahl <jan@cominvent.com> wrote:
And please, I was serious about choosing 7 major features and not adding random 
single improvements. The list has already creeped from 7 to 9 bullets. If you 
want to add something, then ask youself which of the other bullets that are 
less important to MOST USERS and then replace that bullet instead of adding 
more. Agree?

I agree with that very much!  Each bullet added de-values the list as a whole.  
IMO the Java 9 bullet can be removed (too few are even using it yet) and we get 
to 8 bullets; and those 8 are pretty good. 
-- 
Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: 
http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[David Smiley]

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 9:16 AM Jan Høydahl  wrote:

> And please, I was serious about choosing 7 major features and not adding
> random single improvements. The list has already creeped from 7 to 9
> bullets. If you want to add something, then ask youself which of the other
> bullets that are less important to MOST USERS and then replace that bullet
> instead of adding more. Agree?
>

I agree with that very much!  *Each bullet added de-values the list as a
whole.  *IMO the Java 9 bullet can be removed (too few are even using it
yet) and we get to 8 bullets; and those 8 are pretty good.
-- 
Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book:
http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Anshum Gupta]

Thanks Jan, Mike, and everyone else. This reads so much better, and I agree 
that this should be the standard structure.

I’m just updating the website right now. Once done, I plan to send out the 
notification. In case someone still wants to add/edit the notes, “now" is the 
time.

-Anshum



> On Sep 20, 2017, at 6:16 AM, Jan Høydahl  wrote:
> 
> Ok, so I took the liberty of updating 
> https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ReleaseNote70 
>  with my changes
> Note that the previous version of the release notes can still be found at 
> https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ReleaseNote70?action=info 
>  for reference
> 
> Joel, look at the bullet I re-added about Math expressions, feel free to jump 
> in and modify now that it is in the Wiki.
> 
> Cassandra, I totally agree about ref guide syncing and communicating one 
> message.
> Also the practice of listing some of the major features introduced in 6.x is 
> a good thing.
> If you have wording improvements to my summaries, please chime in, I’m not a 
> technical writer :)
> 
> And please, I was serious about choosing 7 major features and not adding 
> random single improvements. The list has already creeped from 7 to 9 bullets. 
> If you want to add something, then ask youself which of the other bullets 
> that are less important to MOST USERS and then replace that bullet instead of 
> adding more. Agree?
> 
> --
> Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
> Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com 
> 
>> 20. sep. 2017 kl. 14.34 skrev Joel Bernstein > >:
>> 
>> Hi Jan,
>> 
>> I added a note for Streaming Expressions in the comments. Could you add that 
>> to the release notes?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Joel Bernstein
>> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ 
>> 
>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 8:17 AM, David Smiley > > wrote:
>> Excellent Jan!  Editorial summaries should be the standard our users expect.
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 7:51 AM Jan Høydahl > > wrote:
>> I think the (Solr) release notes feels more like a dump of JIRA descriptions 
>> than an editorial summary of main highlights.
>> People who want to dive deep can read CHANGES, let’s choose top-7 largest 
>> changes, describe them editorially and refer to CHANGES for the rest 
>> including upgrade notes?
>> 
>> I made a total re-write here 
>> https://gist.github.com/3afd5095834ee9e5d60b2eb304c21bec 
>>  including a 
>> general warning at the end that this is a major release that removes 
>> deprecated stuff and that you should read the upgrade notes.
>> Anshum, feel free to disagree and discard or use at will!
>> 
>> --
>> Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
>> Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com 
>> 
>>> 19. sep. 2017 kl. 22.44 skrev Anshum Gupta >> >:
>>> 
>>> Please find the release notes here:
>>> 
>>> Lucene: https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ReleaseNote70 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Solr: https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ReleaseNote70 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> I am cleaning up the ‘upgrading from 6x’ section to make it shorter but 
>>> feel free to either fix/add things to this. I pushed the artifacts last 
>>> night so there are still about 8 hours to the 24 hours period. 
>>> 
>>> I’ll use the 8 hours to fix the website etc. and announce once all of this 
>>> is wrapped up!
>>> 
>>> -Anshum
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
 On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:46 PM, Varun Thacker > wrote:
 
 I don't think holding up the release process infinitely till we stabilize 
 all the tests is an option. On the other hand getting an RC to build is 
 pretty difficult ( I am facing the same problem with 6.6.1 ) and I am sure 
 people will run into this while voting for the release?
 
 We could identify the top 2/3 tests which fail regularly while building 
 the RC and either disable them or see if someone volunteers to fix them ?
 
 On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 2:53 AM, Ishan Chattopadhyaya 
 > wrote:
 > Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into 
 > failures when
 > checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0 branch so that 
 > building
 > and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody working on this 
 > release?
 
 +1. If it is hampering the release process, I think we should either not 
 release without fixing them, or disable them for release (building, 
 verifying).
 
 On Mon, Aug 

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Jan Høydahl]

Ok, so I took the liberty of updating 
https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ReleaseNote70 
 with my changes
Note that the previous version of the release notes can still be found at 
https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ReleaseNote70?action=info 
 for reference

Joel, look at the bullet I re-added about Math expressions, feel free to jump 
in and modify now that it is in the Wiki.

Cassandra, I totally agree about ref guide syncing and communicating one 
message.
Also the practice of listing some of the major features introduced in 6.x is a 
good thing.
If you have wording improvements to my summaries, please chime in, I’m not a 
technical writer :)

And please, I was serious about choosing 7 major features and not adding random 
single improvements. The list has already creeped from 7 to 9 bullets. If you 
want to add something, then ask youself which of the other bullets that are 
less important to MOST USERS and then replace that bullet instead of adding 
more. Agree?

--
Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com

> 20. sep. 2017 kl. 14.34 skrev Joel Bernstein :
> 
> Hi Jan,
> 
> I added a note for Streaming Expressions in the comments. Could you add that 
> to the release notes?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ 
> 
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 8:17 AM, David Smiley  > wrote:
> Excellent Jan!  Editorial summaries should be the standard our users expect.
> 
> 
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 7:51 AM Jan Høydahl  > wrote:
> I think the (Solr) release notes feels more like a dump of JIRA descriptions 
> than an editorial summary of main highlights.
> People who want to dive deep can read CHANGES, let’s choose top-7 largest 
> changes, describe them editorially and refer to CHANGES for the rest 
> including upgrade notes?
> 
> I made a total re-write here 
> https://gist.github.com/3afd5095834ee9e5d60b2eb304c21bec 
>  including a 
> general warning at the end that this is a major release that removes 
> deprecated stuff and that you should read the upgrade notes.
> Anshum, feel free to disagree and discard or use at will!
> 
> --
> Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
> Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com 
> 
>> 19. sep. 2017 kl. 22.44 skrev Anshum Gupta > >:
>> 
>> Please find the release notes here:
>> 
>> Lucene: https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ReleaseNote70 
>> 
>> 
>> Solr: https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ReleaseNote70 
>>  
>> 
>> I am cleaning up the ‘upgrading from 6x’ section to make it shorter but feel 
>> free to either fix/add things to this. I pushed the artifacts last night so 
>> there are still about 8 hours to the 24 hours period. 
>> 
>> I’ll use the 8 hours to fix the website etc. and announce once all of this 
>> is wrapped up!
>> 
>> -Anshum
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:46 PM, Varun Thacker >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> I don't think holding up the release process infinitely till we stabilize 
>>> all the tests is an option. On the other hand getting an RC to build is 
>>> pretty difficult ( I am facing the same problem with 6.6.1 ) and I am sure 
>>> people will run into this while voting for the release?
>>> 
>>> We could identify the top 2/3 tests which fail regularly while building the 
>>> RC and either disable them or see if someone volunteers to fix them ?
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 2:53 AM, Ishan Chattopadhyaya 
>>> > wrote:
>>> > Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into 
>>> > failures when
>>> > checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0 branch so that 
>>> > building
>>> > and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody working on this release?
>>> 
>>> +1. If it is hampering the release process, I think we should either not 
>>> release without fixing them, or disable them for release (building, 
>>> verifying).
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Anshum Gupta >> > wrote:
>>> Though those failing tests are annoying, I would not recommend ignoring 
>>> those tests. We can manually ignore those test failures when we are testing 
>>> stuff out though.
>>> 
>>> -Anshum
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
 On Aug 28, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Adrien Grand > wrote:
 
 Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into 
 failures when checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0 
 

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Joel Bernstein]

Hi Jan,

I added a note for Streaming Expressions in the comments. Could you add
that to the release notes?




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

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 8:17 AM, David Smiley 
wrote:

> Excellent Jan!  Editorial summaries should be the standard our users
> expect.
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 7:51 AM Jan Høydahl  wrote:
>
>> I think the (Solr) release notes feels more like a dump of JIRA
>> descriptions than an editorial summary of main highlights.
>> People who want to dive deep can read CHANGES, let’s choose top-7 largest
>> changes, describe them editorially and refer to CHANGES for the rest
>> including upgrade notes?
>>
>> I made a total re-write here https://gist.github.com/
>> 3afd5095834ee9e5d60b2eb304c21bec including a general warning at the end
>> that this is a major release that removes deprecated stuff and that you
>> should read the upgrade notes.
>> Anshum, feel free to disagree and discard or use at will!
>>
>> --
>> Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
>> Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com
>>
>> 19. sep. 2017 kl. 22.44 skrev Anshum Gupta :
>>
>> Please find the release notes here:
>>
>> Lucene: https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ReleaseNote70
>>
>> Solr: https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ReleaseNote70
>>
>> I am cleaning up the ‘upgrading from 6x’ section to make it shorter but
>> feel free to either fix/add things to this. I pushed the artifacts last
>> night so there are still about 8 hours to the 24 hours period.
>>
>> I’ll use the 8 hours to fix the website etc. and announce once all of
>> this is wrapped up!
>>
>> -Anshum
>>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:46 PM, Varun Thacker  wrote:
>>
>> I don't think holding up the release process infinitely till we stabilize
>> all the tests is an option. On the other hand getting an RC to build is
>> pretty difficult ( I am facing the same problem with 6.6.1 ) and I am sure
>> people will run into this while voting for the release?
>>
>> We could identify the top 2/3 tests which fail regularly while building
>> the RC and either disable them or see if someone volunteers to fix them ?
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 2:53 AM, Ishan Chattopadhyaya <
>> ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> > Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into
>>> failures when
>>> > checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0 branch so
>>> that building
>>> > and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody working on this
>>> release?
>>>
>>> +1. If it is hampering the release process, I think we should either not
>>> release without fixing them, or disable them for release (building,
>>> verifying).
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Anshum Gupta 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Though those failing tests are annoying, I would not recommend ignoring
 those tests. We can manually ignore those test failures when we are testing
 stuff out though.

 -Anshum



 On Aug 28, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:

 Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into
 failures when checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0
 branch so that building and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody
 working on this release?

 Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 19:23, Anshum Gupta  a
 écrit :

> Thanks Adrien! It worked with a fresh clone, at least ant
> check-licenses worked, so I’m assuming the RC creation would work too.
> I’m running that, and it might take a couple of hours for me to create
> one, as a few SolrCloud tests are still a little flakey and they fail
> occasionally.
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:13 AM, Anshum Gupta  wrote:
>
> Adrien,
>
> Yes, ant check-licenses fails with the same error, and so does ant
> validate (from the root dir). This is after running ant clean -f.
>
> BUILD FAILED
> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following
> error occurred while executing this line:
> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The
> following error occurred while executing this line:
> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62:
> JAR resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar
>
> I didn’t realize that the dependency was upgraded, and what confuses
> me is that the file actually exists.
>
> anshum$ ls analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-5
> icu4j-56.1.jar  icu4j-59.1.jar
>
> It seems like it’s something that git clean, ant clean clean-jars etc.
> didn’t fix. This is really surprising but I’ll try and checking out again
> and creating and RC (after checking for the dependencies).
> I think ant should be responsible for cleaning this up, and not git so

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[David Smiley]

Excellent Jan!  Editorial summaries should be the standard our users expect.

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 7:51 AM Jan Høydahl  wrote:

> I think the (Solr) release notes feels more like a dump of JIRA
> descriptions than an editorial summary of main highlights.
> People who want to dive deep can read CHANGES, let’s choose top-7 largest
> changes, describe them editorially and refer to CHANGES for the rest
> including upgrade notes?
>
> I made a total re-write here
> https://gist.github.com/3afd5095834ee9e5d60b2eb304c21bec including a
> general warning at the end that this is a major release that removes
> deprecated stuff and that you should read the upgrade notes.
> Anshum, feel free to disagree and discard or use at will!
>
> --
> Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
> Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com
>
> 19. sep. 2017 kl. 22.44 skrev Anshum Gupta :
>
> Please find the release notes here:
>
> Lucene: https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ReleaseNote70
>
> Solr: https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ReleaseNote70
>
> I am cleaning up the ‘upgrading from 6x’ section to make it shorter but
> feel free to either fix/add things to this. I pushed the artifacts last
> night so there are still about 8 hours to the 24 hours period.
>
> I’ll use the 8 hours to fix the website etc. and announce once all of this
> is wrapped up!
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:46 PM, Varun Thacker  wrote:
>
> I don't think holding up the release process infinitely till we stabilize
> all the tests is an option. On the other hand getting an RC to build is
> pretty difficult ( I am facing the same problem with 6.6.1 ) and I am sure
> people will run into this while voting for the release?
>
> We could identify the top 2/3 tests which fail regularly while building
> the RC and either disable them or see if someone volunteers to fix them ?
>
> On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 2:53 AM, Ishan Chattopadhyaya <
> ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into
>> failures when
>> > checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0 branch so
>> that building
>> > and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody working on this
>> release?
>>
>> +1. If it is hampering the release process, I think we should either not
>> release without fixing them, or disable them for release (building,
>> verifying).
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Anshum Gupta  wrote:
>>
>>> Though those failing tests are annoying, I would not recommend ignoring
>>> those tests. We can manually ignore those test failures when we are testing
>>> stuff out though.
>>>
>>> -Anshum
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
>>>
>>> Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into
>>> failures when checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0
>>> branch so that building and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody
>>> working on this release?
>>>
>>> Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 19:23, Anshum Gupta  a écrit :
>>>
 Thanks Adrien! It worked with a fresh clone, at least ant
 check-licenses worked, so I’m assuming the RC creation would work too.
 I’m running that, and it might take a couple of hours for me to create
 one, as a few SolrCloud tests are still a little flakey and they fail
 occasionally.

 -Anshum



 On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:13 AM, Anshum Gupta  wrote:

 Adrien,

 Yes, ant check-licenses fails with the same error, and so does ant
 validate (from the root dir). This is after running ant clean -f.

 BUILD FAILED
 /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following error
 occurred while executing this line:
 /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The following
 error occurred while executing this line:
 /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62:
 JAR resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar

 I didn’t realize that the dependency was upgraded, and what confuses me
 is that the file actually exists.

 anshum$ ls analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-5
 icu4j-56.1.jar  icu4j-59.1.jar

 It seems like it’s something that git clean, ant clean clean-jars etc.
 didn’t fix. This is really surprising but I’ll try and checking out again
 and creating and RC (after checking for the dependencies).
 I think ant should be responsible for cleaning this up, and not git so
 there’s something off there.

 -Anshum



 On Aug 28, 2017, at 8:51 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:

 You mentioned you tried to run the script multiple times. Have you run
 git clean at some point? Maybe this is due to a stale working copy?

 Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 08:53, Adrien Grand  a
 

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Cassandra Targett]

You may also want to review what will be in the Ref Guide:
https://builds.apache.org/view/L/view/Lucene/job/Solr-reference-guide-7.0/javadoc/major-changes-in-solr-7.html

Someday when we get the software & doc releases in sync, the release
notes can reference the more detailed documentation in the Ref Guide.
We should view these as complementary, not competing messages written
by different people at different time and work toward making that a
reality.

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 7:00 AM, Uwe Schindler <u...@thetaphi.de> wrote:
> +1, that reads much better!
>
>
>
> I was about to write something similar, although I did this for German
> already. Once it is out it will appear as news article. Just waiting for the
> release!
>
>
>
> Uwe
>
>
>
> -
>
> Uwe Schindler
>
> Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen
>
> http://www.thetaphi.de
>
> eMail: u...@thetaphi.de
>
>
>
> From: Jan Høydahl [mailto:jan@cominvent.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2017 1:51 PM
> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts
>
>
>
> I think the (Solr) release notes feels more like a dump of JIRA descriptions
> than an editorial summary of main highlights.
>
> People who want to dive deep can read CHANGES, let’s choose top-7 largest
> changes, describe them editorially and refer to CHANGES for the rest
> including upgrade notes?
>
>
>
> I made a total re-write here
> https://gist.github.com/3afd5095834ee9e5d60b2eb304c21bec including a general
> warning at the end that this is a major release that removes deprecated
> stuff and that you should read the upgrade notes.
>
> Anshum, feel free to disagree and discard or use at will!
>
>
>
> --
> Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
> Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com
>
>
>
> 19. sep. 2017 kl. 22.44 skrev Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com>:
>
>
>
> Please find the release notes here:
>
>
>
> Lucene: https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ReleaseNote70
>
>
>
> Solr: https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ReleaseNote70
>
>
>
> I am cleaning up the ‘upgrading from 6x’ section to make it shorter but feel
> free to either fix/add things to this. I pushed the artifacts last night so
> there are still about 8 hours to the 24 hours period.
>
>
>
> I’ll use the 8 hours to fix the website etc. and announce once all of this
> is wrapped up!
>
>
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:46 PM, Varun Thacker <va...@vthacker.in> wrote:
>
>
>
> I don't think holding up the release process infinitely till we stabilize
> all the tests is an option. On the other hand getting an RC to build is
> pretty difficult ( I am facing the same problem with 6.6.1 ) and I am sure
> people will run into this while voting for the release?
>
>
>
> We could identify the top 2/3 tests which fail regularly while building the
> RC and either disable them or see if someone volunteers to fix them ?
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 2:53 AM, Ishan Chattopadhyaya
> <ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into
>> failures when
>
>> checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0 branch so that
>> building
>
>> and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody working on this release?
>
> +1. If it is hampering the release process, I think we should either not
> release without fixing them, or disable them for release (building,
> verifying).
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com> wrote:
>
> Though those failing tests are annoying, I would not recommend ignoring
> those tests. We can manually ignore those test failures when we are testing
> stuff out though.
>
>
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Aug 28, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Adrien Grand <jpou...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into failures
> when checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0 branch so
> that building and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody working on
> this release?
>
>
>
> Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 19:23, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com> a écrit :
>
> Thanks Adrien! It worked with a fresh clone, at least ant check-licenses
> worked, so I’m assuming the RC creation would work too.
>
> I’m running that, and it might take a couple of hours for me to create one,
> as a few SolrCloud tests are still a little flakey and they fail
> occasionally.
>
>
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:13 AM, An

RE: Release 7.0 process starts

[Uwe Schindler]

+1, that reads much better!

 

I was about to write something similar, although I did this for German already. 
Once it is out it will appear as news article. Just waiting for the release!

 

Uwe

 

-

Uwe Schindler

Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen

http://www.thetaphi.de <http://www.thetaphi.de/> 

eMail: u...@thetaphi.de

 

From: Jan Høydahl [mailto:jan@cominvent.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2017 1:51 PM
To: dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts

 

I think the (Solr) release notes feels more like a dump of JIRA descriptions 
than an editorial summary of main highlights.

People who want to dive deep can read CHANGES, let’s choose top-7 largest 
changes, describe them editorially and refer to CHANGES for the rest including 
upgrade notes?

 

I made a total re-write here 
https://gist.github.com/3afd5095834ee9e5d60b2eb304c21bec including a general 
warning at the end that this is a major release that removes deprecated stuff 
and that you should read the upgrade notes.

Anshum, feel free to disagree and discard or use at will!

 

--
Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com <http://www.cominvent.com> 

 

19. sep. 2017 kl. 22.44 skrev Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com 
<mailto:ansh...@apple.com> >:

 

Please find the release notes here:

 

Lucene: https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ReleaseNote70

 

Solr: https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ReleaseNote70 

 

I am cleaning up the ‘upgrading from 6x’ section to make it shorter but feel 
free to either fix/add things to this. I pushed the artifacts last night so 
there are still about 8 hours to the 24 hours period. 

 

I’ll use the 8 hours to fix the website etc. and announce once all of this is 
wrapped up!

 

-Anshum

 

 

 

On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:46 PM, Varun Thacker <va...@vthacker.in 
<mailto:va...@vthacker.in> > wrote:

 

I don't think holding up the release process infinitely till we stabilize all 
the tests is an option. On the other hand getting an RC to build is pretty 
difficult ( I am facing the same problem with 6.6.1 ) and I am sure people will 
run into this while voting for the release?

 

We could identify the top 2/3 tests which fail regularly while building the RC 
and either disable them or see if someone volunteers to fix them ?

 

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 2:53 AM, Ishan Chattopadhyaya 
<ichattopadhy...@gmail.com <mailto:ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> > wrote:

> Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into failures 
> when

> checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0 branch so that 
> building

> and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody working on this release?

+1. If it is hampering the release process, I think we should either not 
release without fixing them, or disable them for release (building, verifying).

 

On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com 
<mailto:ansh...@apple.com> > wrote:

Though those failing tests are annoying, I would not recommend ignoring those 
tests. We can manually ignore those test failures when we are testing stuff out 
though.

 

-Anshum

 

 

 

On Aug 28, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Adrien Grand <jpou...@gmail.com 
<mailto:jpou...@gmail.com> > wrote:

 

Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into failures 
when checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0 branch so that 
building and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody working on this 
release?

 

Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 19:23, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com 
<mailto:ansh...@apple.com> > a écrit :

Thanks Adrien! It worked with a fresh clone, at least ant check-licenses 
worked, so I’m assuming the RC creation would work too.

I’m running that, and it might take a couple of hours for me to create one, as 
a few SolrCloud tests are still a little flakey and they fail occasionally.

 

-Anshum

 

 

 

On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:13 AM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com 
<mailto:ansh...@apple.com> > wrote:

 

Adrien,

 

Yes, ant check-licenses fails with the same error, and so does ant validate 
(from the root dir). This is after running ant clean -f.

 

BUILD FAILED

/Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following error occurred 
while executing this line:

/Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The following error 
occurred while executing this line:

/Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62: JAR 
resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar

 

I didn’t realize that the dependency was upgraded, and what confuses me is that 
the file actually exists.

 

anshum$ ls analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-5

icu4j-56.1.jar  icu4j-59.1.jar

 

It seems like it’s something that git clean, ant clean clean-jars etc. didn’t 
fix. This is really surprising but I’ll try and checking out again and creating 
and RC

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Jan Høydahl]

I think the (Solr) release notes feels more like a dump of JIRA descriptions 
than an editorial summary of main highlights.
People who want to dive deep can read CHANGES, let’s choose top-7 largest 
changes, describe them editorially and refer to CHANGES for the rest including 
upgrade notes?

I made a total re-write here 
https://gist.github.com/3afd5095834ee9e5d60b2eb304c21bec including a general 
warning at the end that this is a major release that removes deprecated stuff 
and that you should read the upgrade notes.
Anshum, feel free to disagree and discard or use at will!

--
Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com

> 19. sep. 2017 kl. 22.44 skrev Anshum Gupta :
> 
> Please find the release notes here:
> 
> Lucene: https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ReleaseNote70 
> 
> 
> Solr: https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ReleaseNote70 
>  
> 
> I am cleaning up the ‘upgrading from 6x’ section to make it shorter but feel 
> free to either fix/add things to this. I pushed the artifacts last night so 
> there are still about 8 hours to the 24 hours period. 
> 
> I’ll use the 8 hours to fix the website etc. and announce once all of this is 
> wrapped up!
> 
> -Anshum
> 
> 
> 
>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:46 PM, Varun Thacker > > wrote:
>> 
>> I don't think holding up the release process infinitely till we stabilize 
>> all the tests is an option. On the other hand getting an RC to build is 
>> pretty difficult ( I am facing the same problem with 6.6.1 ) and I am sure 
>> people will run into this while voting for the release?
>> 
>> We could identify the top 2/3 tests which fail regularly while building the 
>> RC and either disable them or see if someone volunteers to fix them ?
>> 
>> On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 2:53 AM, Ishan Chattopadhyaya 
>> > wrote:
>> > Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into 
>> > failures when
>> > checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0 branch so that 
>> > building
>> > and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody working on this release?
>> 
>> +1. If it is hampering the release process, I think we should either not 
>> release without fixing them, or disable them for release (building, 
>> verifying).
>> 
>> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Anshum Gupta > > wrote:
>> Though those failing tests are annoying, I would not recommend ignoring 
>> those tests. We can manually ignore those test failures when we are testing 
>> stuff out though.
>> 
>> -Anshum
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Adrien Grand >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into 
>>> failures when checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0 
>>> branch so that building and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody 
>>> working on this release?
>>> 
>>> Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 19:23, Anshum Gupta >> > a écrit :
>>> Thanks Adrien! It worked with a fresh clone, at least ant check-licenses 
>>> worked, so I’m assuming the RC creation would work too.
>>> I’m running that, and it might take a couple of hours for me to create one, 
>>> as a few SolrCloud tests are still a little flakey and they fail 
>>> occasionally.
>>> 
>>> -Anshum
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
 On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:13 AM, Anshum Gupta > wrote:
 
 Adrien,
 
 Yes, ant check-licenses fails with the same error, and so does ant 
 validate (from the root dir). This is after running ant clean -f.
 
 BUILD FAILED
 /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following error 
 occurred while executing this line:
 /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The following 
 error occurred while executing this line:
 /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62: JAR 
 resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar
 
 I didn’t realize that the dependency was upgraded, and what confuses me is 
 that the file actually exists.
 
 anshum$ ls analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-5
 icu4j-56.1.jar  icu4j-59.1.jar
 
 It seems like it’s something that git clean, ant clean clean-jars etc. 
 didn’t fix. This is really surprising but I’ll try and checking out again 
 and creating and RC (after checking for the dependencies).
 I think ant should be responsible for cleaning this up, and not git so 
 there’s something off there.
 
 -Anshum
 
 
 
> On Aug 28, 2017, at 8:51 AM, Adrien Grand  > wrote:
> 
> You mentioned you 

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Michael McCandless]

OK I got back to a keyboard and added this to the Lucene release notes!

Mike McCandless

http://blog.mikemccandless.com

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 8:50 PM, Michael McCandless <
luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote:

> I'm afk right now but we should add a blurb about much faster document
> deletes/updates in 7.0?
>
> Mike
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 6:32 PM Anshum Gupta  wrote:
>
>> I will, thanks David.
>>
>> -Anshum
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sep 19, 2017, at 2:04 PM, David Smiley 
>> wrote:
>>
>> I improved the Lucene notes on the wiki.  Presumably you'll pick up these
>> changes when you publish the release.
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 4:45 PM Anshum Gupta  wrote:
>>
>>> Please find the release notes here:
>>>
>>> Lucene: https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ReleaseNote70
>>>
>>> Solr: https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ReleaseNote70
>>>
>>> I am cleaning up the ‘upgrading from 6x’ section to make it shorter but
>>> feel free to either fix/add things to this. I pushed the artifacts last
>>> night so there are still about 8 hours to the 24 hours period.
>>>
>>> I’ll use the 8 hours to fix the website etc. and announce once all of
>>> this is wrapped up!
>>>
>>> -Anshum
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:46 PM, Varun Thacker  wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't think holding up the release process infinitely till we
>>> stabilize all the tests is an option. On the other hand getting an RC to
>>> build is pretty difficult ( I am facing the same problem with 6.6.1 ) and I
>>> am sure people will run into this while voting for the release?
>>>
>>> We could identify the top 2/3 tests which fail regularly while building
>>> the RC and either disable them or see if someone volunteers to fix them ?
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 2:53 AM, Ishan Chattopadhyaya <
>>> ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 > Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into
 failures when
 > checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0 branch so
 that building
 > and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody working on this
 release?

 +1. If it is hampering the release process, I think we should either
 not release without fixing them, or disable them for release (building,
 verifying).

 On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Anshum Gupta 
 wrote:

> Though those failing tests are annoying, I would not recommend
> ignoring those tests. We can manually ignore those test failures when we
> are testing stuff out though.
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
> On Aug 28, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
>
> Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into
> failures when checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0
> branch so that building and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody
> working on this release?
>
> Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 19:23, Anshum Gupta  a
> écrit :
>
>> Thanks Adrien! It worked with a fresh clone, at least ant
>> check-licenses worked, so I’m assuming the RC creation would work too.
>> I’m running that, and it might take a couple of hours for me to
>> create one, as a few SolrCloud tests are still a little flakey and they
>> fail occasionally.
>>
>> -Anshum
>>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:13 AM, Anshum Gupta  wrote:
>>
>> Adrien,
>>
>> Yes, ant check-licenses fails with the same error, and so does ant
>> validate (from the root dir). This is after running ant clean -f.
>>
>> BUILD FAILED
>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following
>> error occurred while executing this line:
>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The
>> following error occurred while executing this line:
>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62:
>> JAR resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar
>>
>> I didn’t realize that the dependency was upgraded, and what confuses
>> me is that the file actually exists.
>>
>> anshum$ ls analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-5
>> icu4j-56.1.jar  icu4j-59.1.jar
>>
>> It seems like it’s something that git clean, ant clean clean-jars
>> etc. didn’t fix. This is really surprising but I’ll try and checking out
>> again and creating and RC (after checking for the dependencies).
>> I think ant should be responsible for cleaning this up, and not git
>> so there’s something off there.
>>
>> -Anshum
>>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 8:51 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
>>
>> You mentioned you tried to run the script multiple times. Have you
>> run git clean at some point? Maybe this is due to a stale working copy?
>>
>> Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Varun Thacker]

Should we change this sentence is both lucene and solr release notes

"Apache Solr was tested to be fully compatible with the release of Java 9
and its module system Jigsaw, coming out tomorrow on September 21th!"

to just

"Apache Solr was tested to be fully compatible with Java 9"

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 5:50 PM, Michael McCandless <
luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote:

> I'm afk right now but we should add a blurb about much faster document
> deletes/updates in 7.0?
>
> Mike
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 6:32 PM Anshum Gupta  wrote:
>
>> I will, thanks David.
>>
>> -Anshum
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sep 19, 2017, at 2:04 PM, David Smiley 
>> wrote:
>>
>> I improved the Lucene notes on the wiki.  Presumably you'll pick up these
>> changes when you publish the release.
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 4:45 PM Anshum Gupta  wrote:
>>
>>> Please find the release notes here:
>>>
>>> Lucene: https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ReleaseNote70
>>>
>>> Solr: https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ReleaseNote70
>>>
>>> I am cleaning up the ‘upgrading from 6x’ section to make it shorter but
>>> feel free to either fix/add things to this. I pushed the artifacts last
>>> night so there are still about 8 hours to the 24 hours period.
>>>
>>> I’ll use the 8 hours to fix the website etc. and announce once all of
>>> this is wrapped up!
>>>
>>> -Anshum
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:46 PM, Varun Thacker  wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't think holding up the release process infinitely till we
>>> stabilize all the tests is an option. On the other hand getting an RC to
>>> build is pretty difficult ( I am facing the same problem with 6.6.1 ) and I
>>> am sure people will run into this while voting for the release?
>>>
>>> We could identify the top 2/3 tests which fail regularly while building
>>> the RC and either disable them or see if someone volunteers to fix them ?
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 2:53 AM, Ishan Chattopadhyaya <
>>> ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 > Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into
 failures when
 > checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0 branch so
 that building
 > and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody working on this
 release?

 +1. If it is hampering the release process, I think we should either
 not release without fixing them, or disable them for release (building,
 verifying).

 On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Anshum Gupta 
 wrote:

> Though those failing tests are annoying, I would not recommend
> ignoring those tests. We can manually ignore those test failures when we
> are testing stuff out though.
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
> On Aug 28, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
>
> Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into
> failures when checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0
> branch so that building and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody
> working on this release?
>
> Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 19:23, Anshum Gupta  a
> écrit :
>
>> Thanks Adrien! It worked with a fresh clone, at least ant
>> check-licenses worked, so I’m assuming the RC creation would work too.
>> I’m running that, and it might take a couple of hours for me to
>> create one, as a few SolrCloud tests are still a little flakey and they
>> fail occasionally.
>>
>> -Anshum
>>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:13 AM, Anshum Gupta  wrote:
>>
>> Adrien,
>>
>> Yes, ant check-licenses fails with the same error, and so does ant
>> validate (from the root dir). This is after running ant clean -f.
>>
>> BUILD FAILED
>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following
>> error occurred while executing this line:
>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The
>> following error occurred while executing this line:
>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62:
>> JAR resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar
>>
>> I didn’t realize that the dependency was upgraded, and what confuses
>> me is that the file actually exists.
>>
>> anshum$ ls analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-5
>> icu4j-56.1.jar  icu4j-59.1.jar
>>
>> It seems like it’s something that git clean, ant clean clean-jars
>> etc. didn’t fix. This is really surprising but I’ll try and checking out
>> again and creating and RC (after checking for the dependencies).
>> I think ant should be responsible for cleaning this up, and not git
>> so there’s something off there.
>>
>> -Anshum
>>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 8:51 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
>>
>> You mentioned you 

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Michael McCandless]

I'm afk right now but we should add a blurb about much faster document
deletes/updates in 7.0?

Mike

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 6:32 PM Anshum Gupta  wrote:

> I will, thanks David.
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
> On Sep 19, 2017, at 2:04 PM, David Smiley 
> wrote:
>
> I improved the Lucene notes on the wiki.  Presumably you'll pick up these
> changes when you publish the release.
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 4:45 PM Anshum Gupta  wrote:
>
>> Please find the release notes here:
>>
>> Lucene: https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ReleaseNote70
>>
>> Solr: https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ReleaseNote70
>>
>> I am cleaning up the ‘upgrading from 6x’ section to make it shorter but
>> feel free to either fix/add things to this. I pushed the artifacts last
>> night so there are still about 8 hours to the 24 hours period.
>>
>> I’ll use the 8 hours to fix the website etc. and announce once all of
>> this is wrapped up!
>>
>> -Anshum
>>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:46 PM, Varun Thacker  wrote:
>>
>> I don't think holding up the release process infinitely till we stabilize
>> all the tests is an option. On the other hand getting an RC to build is
>> pretty difficult ( I am facing the same problem with 6.6.1 ) and I am sure
>> people will run into this while voting for the release?
>>
>> We could identify the top 2/3 tests which fail regularly while building
>> the RC and either disable them or see if someone volunteers to fix them ?
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 2:53 AM, Ishan Chattopadhyaya <
>> ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> > Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into
>>> failures when
>>> > checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0 branch so
>>> that building
>>> > and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody working on this
>>> release?
>>>
>>> +1. If it is hampering the release process, I think we should either not
>>> release without fixing them, or disable them for release (building,
>>> verifying).
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Anshum Gupta 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Though those failing tests are annoying, I would not recommend ignoring
 those tests. We can manually ignore those test failures when we are testing
 stuff out though.

 -Anshum



 On Aug 28, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:

 Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into
 failures when checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0
 branch so that building and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody
 working on this release?

 Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 19:23, Anshum Gupta  a
 écrit :

> Thanks Adrien! It worked with a fresh clone, at least ant
> check-licenses worked, so I’m assuming the RC creation would work too.
> I’m running that, and it might take a couple of hours for me to create
> one, as a few SolrCloud tests are still a little flakey and they fail
> occasionally.
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:13 AM, Anshum Gupta  wrote:
>
> Adrien,
>
> Yes, ant check-licenses fails with the same error, and so does ant
> validate (from the root dir). This is after running ant clean -f.
>
> BUILD FAILED
> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following error
> occurred while executing this line:
> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The following
> error occurred while executing this line:
> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62:
> JAR resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar
>
> I didn’t realize that the dependency was upgraded, and what confuses
> me is that the file actually exists.
>
> anshum$ ls analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-5
> icu4j-56.1.jar  icu4j-59.1.jar
>
> It seems like it’s something that git clean, ant clean clean-jars etc.
> didn’t fix. This is really surprising but I’ll try and checking out again
> and creating and RC (after checking for the dependencies).
> I think ant should be responsible for cleaning this up, and not git so
> there’s something off there.
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
> On Aug 28, 2017, at 8:51 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
>
> You mentioned you tried to run the script multiple times. Have you run
> git clean at some point? Maybe this is due to a stale working copy?
>
> Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 08:53, Adrien Grand  a
> écrit :
>
>> Hi Anshum,
>>
>> Does running ant check-licenses from the Lucene directory fail as
>> well? The error message that you are getting looks weird to me since 
>> Lucene
>> 7.0 depends on ICU 59.1, not 56.1 since
>> 

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Anshum Gupta]

I will, thanks David.

-Anshum



> On Sep 19, 2017, at 2:04 PM, David Smiley  wrote:
> 
> I improved the Lucene notes on the wiki.  Presumably you'll pick up these 
> changes when you publish the release.
> 
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 4:45 PM Anshum Gupta  > wrote:
> Please find the release notes here:
> 
> Lucene: https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ReleaseNote70 
> 
> 
> Solr: https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ReleaseNote70 
>  
> 
> I am cleaning up the ‘upgrading from 6x’ section to make it shorter but feel 
> free to either fix/add things to this. I pushed the artifacts last night so 
> there are still about 8 hours to the 24 hours period. 
> 
> I’ll use the 8 hours to fix the website etc. and announce once all of this is 
> wrapped up!
> 
> -Anshum
> 
> 
> 
>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:46 PM, Varun Thacker > > wrote:
>> 
>> I don't think holding up the release process infinitely till we stabilize 
>> all the tests is an option. On the other hand getting an RC to build is 
>> pretty difficult ( I am facing the same problem with 6.6.1 ) and I am sure 
>> people will run into this while voting for the release?
>> 
>> We could identify the top 2/3 tests which fail regularly while building the 
>> RC and either disable them or see if someone volunteers to fix them ?
>> 
>> On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 2:53 AM, Ishan Chattopadhyaya 
>> > wrote:
>> > Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into 
>> > failures when
>> > checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0 branch so that 
>> > building
>> > and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody working on this release?
>> 
>> +1. If it is hampering the release process, I think we should either not 
>> release without fixing them, or disable them for release (building, 
>> verifying).
>> 
>> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Anshum Gupta > > wrote:
>> Though those failing tests are annoying, I would not recommend ignoring 
>> those tests. We can manually ignore those test failures when we are testing 
>> stuff out though.
>> 
>> -Anshum
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Adrien Grand >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into 
>>> failures when checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0 
>>> branch so that building and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody 
>>> working on this release?
>>> 
>>> Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 19:23, Anshum Gupta >> > a écrit :
>>> Thanks Adrien! It worked with a fresh clone, at least ant check-licenses 
>>> worked, so I’m assuming the RC creation would work too.
>>> I’m running that, and it might take a couple of hours for me to create one, 
>>> as a few SolrCloud tests are still a little flakey and they fail 
>>> occasionally.
>>> 
>>> -Anshum
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
 On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:13 AM, Anshum Gupta > wrote:
 
 Adrien,
 
 Yes, ant check-licenses fails with the same error, and so does ant 
 validate (from the root dir). This is after running ant clean -f.
 
 BUILD FAILED
 /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following error 
 occurred while executing this line:
 /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The following 
 error occurred while executing this line:
 /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62: JAR 
 resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar
 
 I didn’t realize that the dependency was upgraded, and what confuses me is 
 that the file actually exists.
 
 anshum$ ls analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-5
 icu4j-56.1.jar  icu4j-59.1.jar
 
 It seems like it’s something that git clean, ant clean clean-jars etc. 
 didn’t fix. This is really surprising but I’ll try and checking out again 
 and creating and RC (after checking for the dependencies).
 I think ant should be responsible for cleaning this up, and not git so 
 there’s something off there.
 
 -Anshum
 
 
 
> On Aug 28, 2017, at 8:51 AM, Adrien Grand  > wrote:
> 
> You mentioned you tried to run the script multiple times. Have you run 
> git clean at some point? Maybe this is due to a stale working copy?
> 
> Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 08:53, Adrien Grand  > a écrit :
> Hi Anshum,
> 
> Does running ant check-licenses from the Lucene directory fail as well? 
> The error message that you are 

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[David Smiley]

I improved the Lucene notes on the wiki.  Presumably you'll pick up these
changes when you publish the release.

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 4:45 PM Anshum Gupta  wrote:

> Please find the release notes here:
>
> Lucene: https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ReleaseNote70
>
> Solr: https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ReleaseNote70
>
> I am cleaning up the ‘upgrading from 6x’ section to make it shorter but
> feel free to either fix/add things to this. I pushed the artifacts last
> night so there are still about 8 hours to the 24 hours period.
>
> I’ll use the 8 hours to fix the website etc. and announce once all of this
> is wrapped up!
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:46 PM, Varun Thacker  wrote:
>
> I don't think holding up the release process infinitely till we stabilize
> all the tests is an option. On the other hand getting an RC to build is
> pretty difficult ( I am facing the same problem with 6.6.1 ) and I am sure
> people will run into this while voting for the release?
>
> We could identify the top 2/3 tests which fail regularly while building
> the RC and either disable them or see if someone volunteers to fix them ?
>
> On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 2:53 AM, Ishan Chattopadhyaya <
> ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into
>> failures when
>> > checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0 branch so
>> that building
>> > and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody working on this
>> release?
>>
>> +1. If it is hampering the release process, I think we should either not
>> release without fixing them, or disable them for release (building,
>> verifying).
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Anshum Gupta  wrote:
>>
>>> Though those failing tests are annoying, I would not recommend ignoring
>>> those tests. We can manually ignore those test failures when we are testing
>>> stuff out though.
>>>
>>> -Anshum
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
>>>
>>> Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into
>>> failures when checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0
>>> branch so that building and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody
>>> working on this release?
>>>
>>> Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 19:23, Anshum Gupta  a écrit :
>>>
 Thanks Adrien! It worked with a fresh clone, at least ant
 check-licenses worked, so I’m assuming the RC creation would work too.
 I’m running that, and it might take a couple of hours for me to create
 one, as a few SolrCloud tests are still a little flakey and they fail
 occasionally.

 -Anshum



 On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:13 AM, Anshum Gupta  wrote:

 Adrien,

 Yes, ant check-licenses fails with the same error, and so does ant
 validate (from the root dir). This is after running ant clean -f.

 BUILD FAILED
 /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following error
 occurred while executing this line:
 /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The following
 error occurred while executing this line:
 /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62:
 JAR resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar

 I didn’t realize that the dependency was upgraded, and what confuses me
 is that the file actually exists.

 anshum$ ls analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-5
 icu4j-56.1.jar  icu4j-59.1.jar

 It seems like it’s something that git clean, ant clean clean-jars etc.
 didn’t fix. This is really surprising but I’ll try and checking out again
 and creating and RC (after checking for the dependencies).
 I think ant should be responsible for cleaning this up, and not git so
 there’s something off there.

 -Anshum



 On Aug 28, 2017, at 8:51 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:

 You mentioned you tried to run the script multiple times. Have you run
 git clean at some point? Maybe this is due to a stale working copy?

 Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 08:53, Adrien Grand  a
 écrit :

> Hi Anshum,
>
> Does running ant check-licenses from the Lucene directory fail as
> well? The error message that you are getting looks weird to me since 
> Lucene
> 7.0 depends on ICU 59.1, not 56.1 since
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7540.
>
> Le ven. 25 août 2017 à 23:42, Anshum Gupta  a
> écrit :
>
>> A quick question, in case someone has an idea around what’s going on.
>> When I run the following command:
>>
>> python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/buildAndPushRelease.py --push-local
>> /Users/anshum/solr/release/7.0.0/rc0 --rc-num 1 --sign 
>>
>> I end up with the following error:
>>
>> 

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Anshum Gupta]

Please find the release notes here:

Lucene: https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ReleaseNote70 


Solr: https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ReleaseNote70 
 

I am cleaning up the ‘upgrading from 6x’ section to make it shorter but feel 
free to either fix/add things to this. I pushed the artifacts last night so 
there are still about 8 hours to the 24 hours period. 

I’ll use the 8 hours to fix the website etc. and announce once all of this is 
wrapped up!

-Anshum



> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:46 PM, Varun Thacker  wrote:
> 
> I don't think holding up the release process infinitely till we stabilize all 
> the tests is an option. On the other hand getting an RC to build is pretty 
> difficult ( I am facing the same problem with 6.6.1 ) and I am sure people 
> will run into this while voting for the release?
> 
> We could identify the top 2/3 tests which fail regularly while building the 
> RC and either disable them or see if someone volunteers to fix them ?
> 
> On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 2:53 AM, Ishan Chattopadhyaya 
> > wrote:
> > Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into 
> > failures when
> > checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0 branch so that 
> > building
> > and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody working on this release?
> 
> +1. If it is hampering the release process, I think we should either not 
> release without fixing them, or disable them for release (building, 
> verifying).
> 
> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Anshum Gupta  > wrote:
> Though those failing tests are annoying, I would not recommend ignoring those 
> tests. We can manually ignore those test failures when we are testing stuff 
> out though.
> 
> -Anshum
> 
> 
> 
>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Adrien Grand > > wrote:
>> 
>> Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into failures 
>> when checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0 branch so 
>> that building and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody working on 
>> this release?
>> 
>> Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 19:23, Anshum Gupta > > a écrit :
>> Thanks Adrien! It worked with a fresh clone, at least ant check-licenses 
>> worked, so I’m assuming the RC creation would work too.
>> I’m running that, and it might take a couple of hours for me to create one, 
>> as a few SolrCloud tests are still a little flakey and they fail 
>> occasionally.
>> 
>> -Anshum
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:13 AM, Anshum Gupta >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> Adrien,
>>> 
>>> Yes, ant check-licenses fails with the same error, and so does ant validate 
>>> (from the root dir). This is after running ant clean -f.
>>> 
>>> BUILD FAILED
>>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following error 
>>> occurred while executing this line:
>>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The following 
>>> error occurred while executing this line:
>>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62: JAR 
>>> resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar
>>> 
>>> I didn’t realize that the dependency was upgraded, and what confuses me is 
>>> that the file actually exists.
>>> 
>>> anshum$ ls analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-5
>>> icu4j-56.1.jar  icu4j-59.1.jar
>>> 
>>> It seems like it’s something that git clean, ant clean clean-jars etc. 
>>> didn’t fix. This is really surprising but I’ll try and checking out again 
>>> and creating and RC (after checking for the dependencies).
>>> I think ant should be responsible for cleaning this up, and not git so 
>>> there’s something off there.
>>> 
>>> -Anshum
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
 On Aug 28, 2017, at 8:51 AM, Adrien Grand > wrote:
 
 You mentioned you tried to run the script multiple times. Have you run git 
 clean at some point? Maybe this is due to a stale working copy?
 
 Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 08:53, Adrien Grand > a écrit :
 Hi Anshum,
 
 Does running ant check-licenses from the Lucene directory fail as well? 
 The error message that you are getting looks weird to me since Lucene 7.0 
 depends on ICU 59.1, not 56.1 since 
 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7540 
 .
 
 Le ven. 25 août 2017 à 23:42, Anshum Gupta > a écrit :
 A quick question, in case someone has an idea around what’s going on. When 
 I run the following command:
 
 python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/buildAndPushRelease.py 

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Varun Thacker]

I don't think holding up the release process infinitely till we stabilize
all the tests is an option. On the other hand getting an RC to build is
pretty difficult ( I am facing the same problem with 6.6.1 ) and I am sure
people will run into this while voting for the release?

We could identify the top 2/3 tests which fail regularly while building the
RC and either disable them or see if someone volunteers to fix them ?

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 2:53 AM, Ishan Chattopadhyaya <
ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into
> failures when
> > checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0 branch so that
> building
> > and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody working on this
> release?
>
> +1. If it is hampering the release process, I think we should either not
> release without fixing them, or disable them for release (building,
> verifying).
>
> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Anshum Gupta  wrote:
>
>> Though those failing tests are annoying, I would not recommend ignoring
>> those tests. We can manually ignore those test failures when we are testing
>> stuff out though.
>>
>> -Anshum
>>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
>>
>> Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into
>> failures when checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0
>> branch so that building and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody
>> working on this release?
>>
>> Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 19:23, Anshum Gupta  a écrit :
>>
>>> Thanks Adrien! It worked with a fresh clone, at least ant check-licenses
>>> worked, so I’m assuming the RC creation would work too.
>>> I’m running that, and it might take a couple of hours for me to create
>>> one, as a few SolrCloud tests are still a little flakey and they fail
>>> occasionally.
>>>
>>> -Anshum
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:13 AM, Anshum Gupta  wrote:
>>>
>>> Adrien,
>>>
>>> Yes, ant check-licenses fails with the same error, and so does ant
>>> validate (from the root dir). This is after running ant clean -f.
>>>
>>> BUILD FAILED
>>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following error
>>> occurred while executing this line:
>>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The following
>>> error occurred while executing this line:
>>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62:
>>> JAR resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar
>>>
>>> I didn’t realize that the dependency was upgraded, and what confuses me
>>> is that the file actually exists.
>>>
>>> anshum$ ls analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-5
>>> icu4j-56.1.jar  icu4j-59.1.jar
>>>
>>> It seems like it’s something that git clean, ant clean clean-jars etc.
>>> didn’t fix. This is really surprising but I’ll try and checking out again
>>> and creating and RC (after checking for the dependencies).
>>> I think ant should be responsible for cleaning this up, and not git so
>>> there’s something off there.
>>>
>>> -Anshum
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 8:51 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
>>>
>>> You mentioned you tried to run the script multiple times. Have you run
>>> git clean at some point? Maybe this is due to a stale working copy?
>>>
>>> Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 08:53, Adrien Grand  a écrit :
>>>
 Hi Anshum,

 Does running ant check-licenses from the Lucene directory fail as well?
 The error message that you are getting looks weird to me since Lucene 7.0
 depends on ICU 59.1, not 56.1 since https://issues.apache.org/jira
 /browse/LUCENE-7540.

 Le ven. 25 août 2017 à 23:42, Anshum Gupta  a
 écrit :

> A quick question, in case someone has an idea around what’s going on.
> When I run the following command:
>
> python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/buildAndPushRelease.py --push-local
> /Users/anshum/solr/release/7.0.0/rc0 --rc-num 1 --sign 
>
> I end up with the following error:
>
> BUILD FAILED
> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following
> error occurred while executing this line:
> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The
> following error occurred while executing this line:
> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62:
> JAR resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar
>
> Any idea as to what’s going on? This generally fails after the tests
> have run, and the script has processed for about 45 minutes and it’s
> consistent i.e. all the times when the tests pass, the process fails with
> this warning.
>
> I can also confirm that this file exists at
> lucene/analysis/icy/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar .
>
> Has anyone else seen this when working on the release?
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
> 

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Ishan Chattopadhyaya]

> Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into
failures when
> checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0 branch so that
building
> and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody working on this release?

+1. If it is hampering the release process, I think we should either not
release without fixing them, or disable them for release (building,
verifying).

On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Anshum Gupta  wrote:

> Though those failing tests are annoying, I would not recommend ignoring
> those tests. We can manually ignore those test failures when we are testing
> stuff out though.
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
> On Aug 28, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
>
> Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into
> failures when checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0
> branch so that building and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody
> working on this release?
>
> Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 19:23, Anshum Gupta  a écrit :
>
>> Thanks Adrien! It worked with a fresh clone, at least ant check-licenses
>> worked, so I’m assuming the RC creation would work too.
>> I’m running that, and it might take a couple of hours for me to create
>> one, as a few SolrCloud tests are still a little flakey and they fail
>> occasionally.
>>
>> -Anshum
>>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:13 AM, Anshum Gupta  wrote:
>>
>> Adrien,
>>
>> Yes, ant check-licenses fails with the same error, and so does ant
>> validate (from the root dir). This is after running ant clean -f.
>>
>> BUILD FAILED
>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following error
>> occurred while executing this line:
>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The following
>> error occurred while executing this line:
>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62:
>> JAR resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar
>>
>> I didn’t realize that the dependency was upgraded, and what confuses me
>> is that the file actually exists.
>>
>> anshum$ ls analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-5
>> icu4j-56.1.jar  icu4j-59.1.jar
>>
>> It seems like it’s something that git clean, ant clean clean-jars etc.
>> didn’t fix. This is really surprising but I’ll try and checking out again
>> and creating and RC (after checking for the dependencies).
>> I think ant should be responsible for cleaning this up, and not git so
>> there’s something off there.
>>
>> -Anshum
>>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 8:51 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
>>
>> You mentioned you tried to run the script multiple times. Have you run
>> git clean at some point? Maybe this is due to a stale working copy?
>>
>> Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 08:53, Adrien Grand  a écrit :
>>
>>> Hi Anshum,
>>>
>>> Does running ant check-licenses from the Lucene directory fail as well?
>>> The error message that you are getting looks weird to me since Lucene 7.0
>>> depends on ICU 59.1, not 56.1 since https://issues.apache.org/
>>> jira/browse/LUCENE-7540.
>>>
>>> Le ven. 25 août 2017 à 23:42, Anshum Gupta  a écrit :
>>>
 A quick question, in case someone has an idea around what’s going on.
 When I run the following command:

 python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/buildAndPushRelease.py --push-local
 /Users/anshum/solr/release/7.0.0/rc0 --rc-num 1 --sign 

 I end up with the following error:

 BUILD FAILED
 /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following error
 occurred while executing this line:
 /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The following
 error occurred while executing this line:
 /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62:
 JAR resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar

 Any idea as to what’s going on? This generally fails after the tests
 have run, and the script has processed for about 45 minutes and it’s
 consistent i.e. all the times when the tests pass, the process fails with
 this warning.

 I can also confirm that this file exists at
 lucene/analysis/icy/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar .

 Has anyone else seen this when working on the release?

 -Anshum



 On Aug 23, 2017, at 4:21 AM, Andrzej Białecki <
 andrzej.biale...@lucidworks.com> wrote:


 On 23 Aug 2017, at 13:06, Uwe Schindler  wrote:

 Keep in mind that there is also branch_7_0.


 Right, but the changes related to these issues were committed to master
 before branch_7_0 was created, and these specific issues are only about
 back-porting to 6x.


 Uww

 Am 23. August 2017 12:26:42 MESZ schrieb "Andrzej Białecki" <
 a...@getopt.org>:
>
>
> On 23 Aug 2017, at 08:15, Anshum Gupta  wrote:
>
> I also found more 

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Anshum Gupta]

Though those failing tests are annoying, I would not recommend ignoring those 
tests. We can manually ignore those test failures when we are testing stuff out 
though.

-Anshum



> On Aug 28, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
> 
> Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into failures 
> when checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0 branch so that 
> building and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody working on this 
> release?
> 
> Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 19:23, Anshum Gupta  > a écrit :
> Thanks Adrien! It worked with a fresh clone, at least ant check-licenses 
> worked, so I’m assuming the RC creation would work too.
> I’m running that, and it might take a couple of hours for me to create one, 
> as a few SolrCloud tests are still a little flakey and they fail occasionally.
> 
> -Anshum
> 
> 
> 
>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:13 AM, Anshum Gupta > > wrote:
>> 
>> Adrien,
>> 
>> Yes, ant check-licenses fails with the same error, and so does ant validate 
>> (from the root dir). This is after running ant clean -f.
>> 
>> BUILD FAILED
>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following error 
>> occurred while executing this line:
>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The following error 
>> occurred while executing this line:
>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62: JAR 
>> resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar
>> 
>> I didn’t realize that the dependency was upgraded, and what confuses me is 
>> that the file actually exists.
>> 
>> anshum$ ls analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-5
>> icu4j-56.1.jar  icu4j-59.1.jar
>> 
>> It seems like it’s something that git clean, ant clean clean-jars etc. 
>> didn’t fix. This is really surprising but I’ll try and checking out again 
>> and creating and RC (after checking for the dependencies).
>> I think ant should be responsible for cleaning this up, and not git so 
>> there’s something off there.
>> 
>> -Anshum
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 8:51 AM, Adrien Grand >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> You mentioned you tried to run the script multiple times. Have you run git 
>>> clean at some point? Maybe this is due to a stale working copy?
>>> 
>>> Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 08:53, Adrien Grand >> > a écrit :
>>> Hi Anshum,
>>> 
>>> Does running ant check-licenses from the Lucene directory fail as well? The 
>>> error message that you are getting looks weird to me since Lucene 7.0 
>>> depends on ICU 59.1, not 56.1 since 
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7540 
>>> .
>>> 
>>> Le ven. 25 août 2017 à 23:42, Anshum Gupta >> > a écrit :
>>> A quick question, in case someone has an idea around what’s going on. When 
>>> I run the following command:
>>> 
>>> python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/buildAndPushRelease.py --push-local 
>>> /Users/anshum/solr/release/7.0.0/rc0 --rc-num 1 --sign 
>>> 
>>> I end up with the following error:
>>> 
>>> BUILD FAILED
>>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following error 
>>> occurred while executing this line:
>>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The following 
>>> error occurred while executing this line:
>>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62: JAR 
>>> resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar
>>> 
>>> Any idea as to what’s going on? This generally fails after the tests have 
>>> run, and the script has processed for about 45 minutes and it’s consistent 
>>> i.e. all the times when the tests pass, the process fails with this warning.
>>> 
>>> I can also confirm that this file exists at 
>>> lucene/analysis/icy/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar .
>>> 
>>> Has anyone else seen this when working on the release?
>>> 
>>> -Anshum
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
 On Aug 23, 2017, at 4:21 AM, Andrzej Białecki 
 > 
 wrote:
 
 
> On 23 Aug 2017, at 13:06, Uwe Schindler  > wrote:
> 
> Keep in mind that there is also branch_7_0.
 
 Right, but the changes related to these issues were committed to master 
 before branch_7_0 was created, and these specific issues are only about 
 back-porting to 6x.
 
> 
> Uww
> 
> Am 23. August 2017 12:26:42 MESZ schrieb "Andrzej Białecki" 
> >:
> 
>> On 23 Aug 2017, at 08:15, Anshum Gupta > > wrote:
>> 
>> I also found more issues when comparing 7x, with 6x this time. I’ll take 
>> a look at wether it’s just the CHANGES entries or have 

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Adrien Grand]

Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into
failures when checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0
branch so that building and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody
working on this release?

Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 19:23, Anshum Gupta  a écrit :

> Thanks Adrien! It worked with a fresh clone, at least ant check-licenses
> worked, so I’m assuming the RC creation would work too.
> I’m running that, and it might take a couple of hours for me to create
> one, as a few SolrCloud tests are still a little flakey and they fail
> occasionally.
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:13 AM, Anshum Gupta  wrote:
>
> Adrien,
>
> Yes, ant check-licenses fails with the same error, and so does ant
> validate (from the root dir). This is after running ant clean -f.
>
> BUILD FAILED
> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following error
> occurred while executing this line:
> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The following
> error occurred while executing this line:
> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62: JAR
> resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar
>
> I didn’t realize that the dependency was upgraded, and what confuses me is
> that the file actually exists.
>
> anshum$ ls analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-5
> icu4j-56.1.jar  icu4j-59.1.jar
>
> It seems like it’s something that git clean, ant clean clean-jars etc.
> didn’t fix. This is really surprising but I’ll try and checking out again
> and creating and RC (after checking for the dependencies).
> I think ant should be responsible for cleaning this up, and not git so
> there’s something off there.
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
> On Aug 28, 2017, at 8:51 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
>
> You mentioned you tried to run the script multiple times. Have you run git
> clean at some point? Maybe this is due to a stale working copy?
>
> Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 08:53, Adrien Grand  a écrit :
>
>> Hi Anshum,
>>
>> Does running ant check-licenses from the Lucene directory fail as well?
>> The error message that you are getting looks weird to me since Lucene 7.0
>> depends on ICU 59.1, not 56.1 since
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7540.
>>
>> Le ven. 25 août 2017 à 23:42, Anshum Gupta  a écrit :
>>
>>> A quick question, in case someone has an idea around what’s going on.
>>> When I run the following command:
>>>
>>> python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/buildAndPushRelease.py --push-local
>>> /Users/anshum/solr/release/7.0.0/rc0 --rc-num 1 --sign 
>>>
>>> I end up with the following error:
>>>
>>> BUILD FAILED
>>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following error
>>> occurred while executing this line:
>>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The following
>>> error occurred while executing this line:
>>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62:
>>> JAR resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar
>>>
>>> Any idea as to what’s going on? This generally fails after the tests
>>> have run, and the script has processed for about 45 minutes and it’s
>>> consistent i.e. all the times when the tests pass, the process fails with
>>> this warning.
>>>
>>> I can also confirm that this file exists at
>>> lucene/analysis/icy/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar .
>>>
>>> Has anyone else seen this when working on the release?
>>>
>>> -Anshum
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 23, 2017, at 4:21 AM, Andrzej Białecki <
>>> andrzej.biale...@lucidworks.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 23 Aug 2017, at 13:06, Uwe Schindler  wrote:
>>>
>>> Keep in mind that there is also branch_7_0.
>>>
>>>
>>> Right, but the changes related to these issues were committed to master
>>> before branch_7_0 was created, and these specific issues are only about
>>> back-porting to 6x.
>>>
>>>
>>> Uww
>>>
>>> Am 23. August 2017 12:26:42 MESZ schrieb "Andrzej Białecki" <
>>> a...@getopt.org>:


 On 23 Aug 2017, at 08:15, Anshum Gupta  wrote:

 I also found more issues when comparing 7x, with 6x this time. I’ll
 take a look at wether it’s just the CHANGES entries or have these actually
 missed the branch. I assume it’s just the CHANGES, but want to be sure. If
 the committers involved can pitch in, I’d appreciate, else I’ll work on
 this for a bit right now and continue with this tomorrow morning.

 - SOLR-10477 (Ab)


 This is a partial back-port of relevant improvements from master to 6x,
 so there are no strictly corresponding commits on 7x/master.

 - SOLR-10631: Metric reporters leak on 6x. (Ab)


 This one has been fixed as part of other related issues in branches 7.x
 / master, so it only required a specific fix for 6x.

 - SOLR-1 (Ab)


 This has been committed first to 7x, then to 6x and it’s present in
 

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Anshum Gupta]

Thanks Adrien! It worked with a fresh clone, at least ant check-licenses 
worked, so I’m assuming the RC creation would work too.
I’m running that, and it might take a couple of hours for me to create one, as 
a few SolrCloud tests are still a little flakey and they fail occasionally.

-Anshum



> On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:13 AM, Anshum Gupta  wrote:
> 
> Adrien,
> 
> Yes, ant check-licenses fails with the same error, and so does ant validate 
> (from the root dir). This is after running ant clean -f.
> 
> BUILD FAILED
> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following error 
> occurred while executing this line:
> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The following error 
> occurred while executing this line:
> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62: JAR 
> resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar
> 
> I didn’t realize that the dependency was upgraded, and what confuses me is 
> that the file actually exists.
> 
> anshum$ ls analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-5
> icu4j-56.1.jar  icu4j-59.1.jar
> 
> It seems like it’s something that git clean, ant clean clean-jars etc. didn’t 
> fix. This is really surprising but I’ll try and checking out again and 
> creating and RC (after checking for the dependencies).
> I think ant should be responsible for cleaning this up, and not git so 
> there’s something off there.
> 
> -Anshum
> 
> 
> 
>> On Aug 28, 2017, at 8:51 AM, Adrien Grand > > wrote:
>> 
>> You mentioned you tried to run the script multiple times. Have you run git 
>> clean at some point? Maybe this is due to a stale working copy?
>> 
>> Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 08:53, Adrien Grand > > a écrit :
>> Hi Anshum,
>> 
>> Does running ant check-licenses from the Lucene directory fail as well? The 
>> error message that you are getting looks weird to me since Lucene 7.0 
>> depends on ICU 59.1, not 56.1 since 
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7540 
>> .
>> 
>> Le ven. 25 août 2017 à 23:42, Anshum Gupta > > a écrit :
>> A quick question, in case someone has an idea around what’s going on. When I 
>> run the following command:
>> 
>> python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/buildAndPushRelease.py --push-local 
>> /Users/anshum/solr/release/7.0.0/rc0 --rc-num 1 --sign 
>> 
>> I end up with the following error:
>> 
>> BUILD FAILED
>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following error 
>> occurred while executing this line:
>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The following error 
>> occurred while executing this line:
>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62: JAR 
>> resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar
>> 
>> Any idea as to what’s going on? This generally fails after the tests have 
>> run, and the script has processed for about 45 minutes and it’s consistent 
>> i.e. all the times when the tests pass, the process fails with this warning.
>> 
>> I can also confirm that this file exists at 
>> lucene/analysis/icy/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar .
>> 
>> Has anyone else seen this when working on the release?
>> 
>> -Anshum
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Aug 23, 2017, at 4:21 AM, Andrzej Białecki 
>>> > 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
 On 23 Aug 2017, at 13:06, Uwe Schindler > wrote:
 
 Keep in mind that there is also branch_7_0.
>>> 
>>> Right, but the changes related to these issues were committed to master 
>>> before branch_7_0 was created, and these specific issues are only about 
>>> back-porting to 6x.
>>> 
 
 Uww
 
 Am 23. August 2017 12:26:42 MESZ schrieb "Andrzej Białecki" 
 >:
 
> On 23 Aug 2017, at 08:15, Anshum Gupta  > wrote:
> 
> I also found more issues when comparing 7x, with 6x this time. I’ll take 
> a look at wether it’s just the CHANGES entries or have these actually 
> missed the branch. I assume it’s just the CHANGES, but want to be sure. 
> If the committers involved can pitch in, I’d appreciate, else I’ll work 
> on this for a bit right now and continue with this tomorrow morning.
> 
> - SOLR-10477 (Ab)
 
 This is a partial back-port of relevant improvements from master to 6x, so 
 there are no strictly corresponding commits on 7x/master.
 
> - SOLR-10631: Metric reporters leak on 6x. (Ab)
 
 This one has been fixed as part of other related issues in branches 7.x / 
 master, so it only required a specific fix for 6x.
 
> - SOLR-1 (Ab)
> 
 
 This has been committed first to 7x, then to 6x and it’s present in 
 branch_6_6.

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Anshum Gupta]

Adrien,

Yes, ant check-licenses fails with the same error, and so does ant validate 
(from the root dir). This is after running ant clean -f.

BUILD FAILED
/Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following error occurred 
while executing this line:
/Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The following error 
occurred while executing this line:
/Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62: JAR 
resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar

I didn’t realize that the dependency was upgraded, and what confuses me is that 
the file actually exists.

anshum$ ls analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-5
icu4j-56.1.jar  icu4j-59.1.jar

It seems like it’s something that git clean, ant clean clean-jars etc. didn’t 
fix. This is really surprising but I’ll try and checking out again and creating 
and RC (after checking for the dependencies).
I think ant should be responsible for cleaning this up, and not git so there’s 
something off there.

-Anshum



> On Aug 28, 2017, at 8:51 AM, Adrien Grand  wrote:
> 
> You mentioned you tried to run the script multiple times. Have you run git 
> clean at some point? Maybe this is due to a stale working copy?
> 
> Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 08:53, Adrien Grand  > a écrit :
> Hi Anshum,
> 
> Does running ant check-licenses from the Lucene directory fail as well? The 
> error message that you are getting looks weird to me since Lucene 7.0 depends 
> on ICU 59.1, not 56.1 since https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7540 
> .
> 
> Le ven. 25 août 2017 à 23:42, Anshum Gupta  > a écrit :
> A quick question, in case someone has an idea around what’s going on. When I 
> run the following command:
> 
> python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/buildAndPushRelease.py --push-local 
> /Users/anshum/solr/release/7.0.0/rc0 --rc-num 1 --sign 
> 
> I end up with the following error:
> 
> BUILD FAILED
> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following error 
> occurred while executing this line:
> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The following error 
> occurred while executing this line:
> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62: JAR 
> resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar
> 
> Any idea as to what’s going on? This generally fails after the tests have 
> run, and the script has processed for about 45 minutes and it’s consistent 
> i.e. all the times when the tests pass, the process fails with this warning.
> 
> I can also confirm that this file exists at 
> lucene/analysis/icy/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar .
> 
> Has anyone else seen this when working on the release?
> 
> -Anshum
> 
> 
> 
>> On Aug 23, 2017, at 4:21 AM, Andrzej Białecki 
>> > 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On 23 Aug 2017, at 13:06, Uwe Schindler >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> Keep in mind that there is also branch_7_0.
>> 
>> Right, but the changes related to these issues were committed to master 
>> before branch_7_0 was created, and these specific issues are only about 
>> back-porting to 6x.
>> 
>>> 
>>> Uww
>>> 
>>> Am 23. August 2017 12:26:42 MESZ schrieb "Andrzej Białecki" 
>>> >:
>>> 
 On 23 Aug 2017, at 08:15, Anshum Gupta > wrote:
 
 I also found more issues when comparing 7x, with 6x this time. I’ll take a 
 look at wether it’s just the CHANGES entries or have these actually missed 
 the branch. I assume it’s just the CHANGES, but want to be sure. If the 
 committers involved can pitch in, I’d appreciate, else I’ll work on this 
 for a bit right now and continue with this tomorrow morning.
 
 - SOLR-10477 (Ab)
>>> 
>>> This is a partial back-port of relevant improvements from master to 6x, so 
>>> there are no strictly corresponding commits on 7x/master.
>>> 
 - SOLR-10631: Metric reporters leak on 6x. (Ab)
>>> 
>>> This one has been fixed as part of other related issues in branches 7.x / 
>>> master, so it only required a specific fix for 6x.
>>> 
 - SOLR-1 (Ab)
 
>>> 
>>> This has been committed first to 7x, then to 6x and it’s present in 
>>> branch_6_6.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ---
>>> Best regards,
>>> 
>>> Andrzej Bialecki
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Uwe Schindler
>>> Achterdiek 19, 28357 Bremen
>>> https://www.thetaphi.de 
> 

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Adrien Grand]

You mentioned you tried to run the script multiple times. Have you run git
clean at some point? Maybe this is due to a stale working copy?

Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 08:53, Adrien Grand  a écrit :

> Hi Anshum,
>
> Does running ant check-licenses from the Lucene directory fail as well?
> The error message that you are getting looks weird to me since Lucene 7.0
> depends on ICU 59.1, not 56.1 since
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7540.
>
> Le ven. 25 août 2017 à 23:42, Anshum Gupta  a écrit :
>
>> A quick question, in case someone has an idea around what’s going on.
>> When I run the following command:
>>
>> python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/buildAndPushRelease.py --push-local
>> /Users/anshum/solr/release/7.0.0/rc0 --rc-num 1 --sign 
>>
>> I end up with the following error:
>>
>> BUILD FAILED
>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following error
>> occurred while executing this line:
>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The following
>> error occurred while executing this line:
>> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62: JAR
>> resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar
>>
>> Any idea as to what’s going on? This generally fails after the tests have
>> run, and the script has processed for about 45 minutes and it’s consistent
>> i.e. all the times when the tests pass, the process fails with this warning.
>>
>> I can also confirm that this file exists at
>> lucene/analysis/icy/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar .
>>
>> Has anyone else seen this when working on the release?
>>
>> -Anshum
>>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 23, 2017, at 4:21 AM, Andrzej Białecki <
>> andrzej.biale...@lucidworks.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 23 Aug 2017, at 13:06, Uwe Schindler  wrote:
>>
>> Keep in mind that there is also branch_7_0.
>>
>>
>> Right, but the changes related to these issues were committed to master
>> before branch_7_0 was created, and these specific issues are only about
>> back-porting to 6x.
>>
>>
>> Uww
>>
>> Am 23. August 2017 12:26:42 MESZ schrieb "Andrzej Białecki" <
>> a...@getopt.org>:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 23 Aug 2017, at 08:15, Anshum Gupta  wrote:
>>>
>>> I also found more issues when comparing 7x, with 6x this time. I’ll take
>>> a look at wether it’s just the CHANGES entries or have these actually
>>> missed the branch. I assume it’s just the CHANGES, but want to be sure. If
>>> the committers involved can pitch in, I’d appreciate, else I’ll work on
>>> this for a bit right now and continue with this tomorrow morning.
>>>
>>> - SOLR-10477 (Ab)
>>>
>>>
>>> This is a partial back-port of relevant improvements from master to 6x,
>>> so there are no strictly corresponding commits on 7x/master.
>>>
>>> - SOLR-10631: Metric reporters leak on 6x. (Ab)
>>>
>>>
>>> This one has been fixed as part of other related issues in branches 7.x
>>> / master, so it only required a specific fix for 6x.
>>>
>>> - SOLR-1 (Ab)
>>>
>>>
>>> This has been committed first to 7x, then to 6x and it’s present in
>>> branch_6_6.
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Andrzej Bialecki
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Uwe Schindler
>> Achterdiek 19, 28357 Bremen
>> https://www.thetaphi.de
>>
>>
>>
>>

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Adrien Grand]

Hi Anshum,

Does running ant check-licenses from the Lucene directory fail as well? The
error message that you are getting looks weird to me since Lucene 7.0
depends on ICU 59.1, not 56.1 since
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7540.

Le ven. 25 août 2017 à 23:42, Anshum Gupta  a écrit :

> A quick question, in case someone has an idea around what’s going on. When
> I run the following command:
>
> python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/buildAndPushRelease.py --push-local
> /Users/anshum/solr/release/7.0.0/rc0 --rc-num 1 --sign 
>
> I end up with the following error:
>
> BUILD FAILED
> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following error
> occurred while executing this line:
> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The following
> error occurred while executing this line:
> /Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62: JAR
> resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar
>
> Any idea as to what’s going on? This generally fails after the tests have
> run, and the script has processed for about 45 minutes and it’s consistent
> i.e. all the times when the tests pass, the process fails with this warning.
>
> I can also confirm that this file exists at
> lucene/analysis/icy/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar .
>
> Has anyone else seen this when working on the release?
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
> On Aug 23, 2017, at 4:21 AM, Andrzej Białecki <
> andrzej.biale...@lucidworks.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 23 Aug 2017, at 13:06, Uwe Schindler  wrote:
>
> Keep in mind that there is also branch_7_0.
>
>
> Right, but the changes related to these issues were committed to master
> before branch_7_0 was created, and these specific issues are only about
> back-porting to 6x.
>
>
> Uww
>
> Am 23. August 2017 12:26:42 MESZ schrieb "Andrzej Białecki"  >:
>>
>>
>> On 23 Aug 2017, at 08:15, Anshum Gupta  wrote:
>>
>> I also found more issues when comparing 7x, with 6x this time. I’ll take
>> a look at wether it’s just the CHANGES entries or have these actually
>> missed the branch. I assume it’s just the CHANGES, but want to be sure. If
>> the committers involved can pitch in, I’d appreciate, else I’ll work on
>> this for a bit right now and continue with this tomorrow morning.
>>
>> - SOLR-10477 (Ab)
>>
>>
>> This is a partial back-port of relevant improvements from master to 6x,
>> so there are no strictly corresponding commits on 7x/master.
>>
>> - SOLR-10631: Metric reporters leak on 6x. (Ab)
>>
>>
>> This one has been fixed as part of other related issues in branches 7.x /
>> master, so it only required a specific fix for 6x.
>>
>> - SOLR-1 (Ab)
>>
>>
>> This has been committed first to 7x, then to 6x and it’s present in
>> branch_6_6.
>>
>>
>> ---
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Andrzej Bialecki
>>
>>
> --
> Uwe Schindler
> Achterdiek 19, 28357 Bremen
> https://www.thetaphi.de
>
>
>
>

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Anshum Gupta]

A quick question, in case someone has an idea around what’s going on. When I 
run the following command:

python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/buildAndPushRelease.py --push-local 
/Users/anshum/solr/release/7.0.0/rc0 --rc-num 1 --sign 

I end up with the following error:

BUILD FAILED
/Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following error occurred 
while executing this line:
/Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The following error 
occurred while executing this line:
/Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62: JAR 
resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar

Any idea as to what’s going on? This generally fails after the tests have run, 
and the script has processed for about 45 minutes and it’s consistent i.e. all 
the times when the tests pass, the process fails with this warning.

I can also confirm that this file exists at 
lucene/analysis/icy/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar .

Has anyone else seen this when working on the release?

-Anshum



> On Aug 23, 2017, at 4:21 AM, Andrzej Białecki 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 23 Aug 2017, at 13:06, Uwe Schindler > > wrote:
>> 
>> Keep in mind that there is also branch_7_0.
> 
> Right, but the changes related to these issues were committed to master 
> before branch_7_0 was created, and these specific issues are only about 
> back-porting to 6x.
> 
>> 
>> Uww
>> 
>> Am 23. August 2017 12:26:42 MESZ schrieb "Andrzej Białecki" > >:
>> 
>>> On 23 Aug 2017, at 08:15, Anshum Gupta >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> I also found more issues when comparing 7x, with 6x this time. I’ll take a 
>>> look at wether it’s just the CHANGES entries or have these actually missed 
>>> the branch. I assume it’s just the CHANGES, but want to be sure. If the 
>>> committers involved can pitch in, I’d appreciate, else I’ll work on this 
>>> for a bit right now and continue with this tomorrow morning.
>>> 
>>> - SOLR-10477 (Ab)
>> 
>> This is a partial back-port of relevant improvements from master to 6x, so 
>> there are no strictly corresponding commits on 7x/master.
>> 
>>> - SOLR-10631: Metric reporters leak on 6x. (Ab)
>> 
>> This one has been fixed as part of other related issues in branches 7.x / 
>> master, so it only required a specific fix for 6x.
>> 
>>> - SOLR-1 (Ab)
>>> 
>> 
>> This has been committed first to 7x, then to 6x and it’s present in 
>> branch_6_6.
>> 
>> 
>> ---
>> Best regards,
>> 
>> Andrzej Bialecki
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Uwe Schindler
>> Achterdiek 19, 28357 Bremen
>> https://www.thetaphi.de 

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Alexandre Rafalovitch]

A small nitpick, but could I get my surname normalize to its passport
spelling while those files are edited anyway :-) I am out of date on
my environment setup right now, so getting it fixed myself would take
a little longer.

It is Rafalovitch, not Rafalovich. (tch in the end, blame the Soviet
passport bureau for that extra fun!). I think

Thank you,
   Alex.

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


On 23 August 2017 at 01:50, Anshum Gupta  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I’m sanitizing the CHANGES.txt in branch_7_0, before cutting the RC. Here
> are a couple of conflicting CHANGES.txt entries:
>
> - SOLR-11128: Entry in 'Other changes' on branch_7_0 , but in 'Other
> changes' on master (Varun, Ishan)
> - SOLR-10821: Mention in master (7.0 section) but not in branch_7_0 (Noble,
> Cassandra, Shalin)
>
> I am going to add the entry for SOLR-10821 on branch_7_0, and move the entry
> to the bug fix section on master for SOLR-11228.
>
> If the committers involved here think that isn’t apt, let me know or feel
> free to fix it.
>
> Getting the RC generally takes a few tries, and I’m also helping Varun with
> the RC build for 6.6.1, so all of you would have more than a few hours for
> this :).
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>

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

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Andrzej Białecki]

> On 23 Aug 2017, at 13:06, Uwe Schindler  wrote:
> 
> Keep in mind that there is also branch_7_0.

Right, but the changes related to these issues were committed to master before 
branch_7_0 was created, and these specific issues are only about back-porting 
to 6x.

> 
> Uww
> 
> Am 23. August 2017 12:26:42 MESZ schrieb "Andrzej Białecki" :
> 
>> On 23 Aug 2017, at 08:15, Anshum Gupta > > wrote:
>> 
>> I also found more issues when comparing 7x, with 6x this time. I’ll take a 
>> look at wether it’s just the CHANGES entries or have these actually missed 
>> the branch. I assume it’s just the CHANGES, but want to be sure. If the 
>> committers involved can pitch in, I’d appreciate, else I’ll work on this for 
>> a bit right now and continue with this tomorrow morning.
>> 
>> - SOLR-10477 (Ab)
> 
> This is a partial back-port of relevant improvements from master to 6x, so 
> there are no strictly corresponding commits on 7x/master.
> 
>> - SOLR-10631: Metric reporters leak on 6x. (Ab)
> 
> This one has been fixed as part of other related issues in branches 7.x / 
> master, so it only required a specific fix for 6x.
> 
>> - SOLR-1 (Ab)
>> 
> 
> This has been committed first to 7x, then to 6x and it’s present in 
> branch_6_6.
> 
> 
> ---
> Best regards,
> 
> Andrzej Bialecki
> 
> 
> --
> Uwe Schindler
> Achterdiek 19, 28357 Bremen
> https://www.thetaphi.de 

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Uwe Schindler]

Keep in mind that there is also branch_7_0.

Uww

Am 23. August 2017 12:26:42 MESZ schrieb "Andrzej Białecki" :
>
>> On 23 Aug 2017, at 08:15, Anshum Gupta  wrote:
>> 
>> I also found more issues when comparing 7x, with 6x this time. I’ll
>take a look at wether it’s just the CHANGES entries or have these
>actually missed the branch. I assume it’s just the CHANGES, but want to
>be sure. If the committers involved can pitch in, I’d appreciate, else
>I’ll work on this for a bit right now and continue with this tomorrow
>morning.
>> 
>> - SOLR-10477 (Ab)
>
>This is a partial back-port of relevant improvements from master to 6x,
>so there are no strictly corresponding commits on 7x/master.
>
>> - SOLR-10631: Metric reporters leak on 6x. (Ab)
>
>This one has been fixed as part of other related issues in branches 7.x
>/ master, so it only required a specific fix for 6x.
>
>> - SOLR-1 (Ab)
>> 
>
>This has been committed first to 7x, then to 6x and it’s present in
>branch_6_6.
>
>
>---
>Best regards,
>
>Andrzej Bialecki

--
Uwe Schindler
Achterdiek 19, 28357 Bremen
https://www.thetaphi.de

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Andrzej Białecki]

> On 23 Aug 2017, at 08:15, Anshum Gupta  wrote:
> 
> I also found more issues when comparing 7x, with 6x this time. I’ll take a 
> look at wether it’s just the CHANGES entries or have these actually missed 
> the branch. I assume it’s just the CHANGES, but want to be sure. If the 
> committers involved can pitch in, I’d appreciate, else I’ll work on this for 
> a bit right now and continue with this tomorrow morning.
> 
> - SOLR-10477 (Ab)

This is a partial back-port of relevant improvements from master to 6x, so 
there are no strictly corresponding commits on 7x/master.

> - SOLR-10631: Metric reporters leak on 6x. (Ab)

This one has been fixed as part of other related issues in branches 7.x / 
master, so it only required a specific fix for 6x.

> - SOLR-1 (Ab)
> 

This has been committed first to 7x, then to 6x and it’s present in branch_6_6.


---
Best regards,

Andrzej Bialecki

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Jan Høydahl]

> - SOLR-10586 (janhoy)
> - SOLR-10587 (janhoy)

Both of these are only committed to 6.x branch, while the related SOLR-10584 
and SOLR-10585 were committed to 7.x. This is correct.

--
Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com

> 23. aug. 2017 kl. 08.15 skrev Anshum Gupta :
> 
> I also found more issues when comparing 7x, with 6x this time. I’ll take a 
> look at wether it’s just the CHANGES entries or have these actually missed 
> the branch. I assume it’s just the CHANGES, but want to be sure. If the 
> committers involved can pitch in, I’d appreciate, else I’ll work on this for 
> a bit right now and continue with this tomorrow morning.
> 
> - SOLR-10477 (Ab)
> - SOLR-10631: Metric reporters leak on 6x. (Ab)
> - SOLR-10718: Shawn Feldman, Hrishikesh Gadre, janhoy, Jason Gerlowski via 
> Ishan Chattopadhyaya)
> - SOLR-10586 (janhoy)
> - SOLR-10587 (janhoy)
> - SOLR-1 (Ab)
> 
> I don’t think we’re missing any commits after this as I’ve now compared both 
> 6x with 7.0, and master with 7.0.
> 
> -Anshum
> 
> 
> 
>> On Aug 22, 2017, at 10:50 PM, Anshum Gupta > > wrote:
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I’m sanitizing the CHANGES.txt in branch_7_0, before cutting the RC. Here 
>> are a couple of conflicting CHANGES.txt entries:
>> 
>> - SOLR-11128: Entry in 'Other changes' on branch_7_0 , but in 'Other 
>> changes' on master (Varun, Ishan)
>> - SOLR-10821: Mention in master (7.0 section) but not in branch_7_0 (Noble, 
>> Cassandra, Shalin)
>> 
>> I am going to add the entry for SOLR-10821 on branch_7_0, and move the entry 
>> to the bug fix section on master for SOLR-11228. 
>> 
>> If the committers involved here think that isn’t apt, let me know or feel 
>> free to fix it.
>> 
>> Getting the RC generally takes a few tries, and I’m also helping Varun with 
>> the RC build for 6.6.1, so all of you would have more than a few hours for 
>> this :).
>> 
>> -Anshum
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Anshum Gupta]

Guess I shouldn’t commit anything important tonight, there was a typo in my 
original email.

SOLR-11228 is the current JIRA, and it was a false alarm - vimdiff collapsed a 
bunch of lines which I missed.
It’s a bug fix in both 6.6.1, and 7.0 so we are good on this one.

-Anshum



> On Aug 22, 2017, at 10:50 PM, Anshum Gupta  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I’m sanitizing the CHANGES.txt in branch_7_0, before cutting the RC. Here are 
> a couple of conflicting CHANGES.txt entries:
> 
> - SOLR-11128: Entry in 'Other changes' on branch_7_0 , but in 'Other changes' 
> on master (Varun, Ishan)
> - SOLR-10821: Mention in master (7.0 section) but not in branch_7_0 (Noble, 
> Cassandra, Shalin)
> 
> I am going to add the entry for SOLR-10821 on branch_7_0, and move the entry 
> to the bug fix section on master for SOLR-11228. 
> 
> If the committers involved here think that isn’t apt, let me know or feel 
> free to fix it.
> 
> Getting the RC generally takes a few tries, and I’m also helping Varun with 
> the RC build for 6.6.1, so all of you would have more than a few hours for 
> this :).
> 
> -Anshum
> 
> 
> 

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Anshum Gupta]

Thanks Shalin!

-Anshum



> On Aug 22, 2017, at 11:10 PM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Anshum,
> 
> I've added SOLR-10821 to the CHANGES.txt on both branch_7x and branch_7_0
> 
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 11:20 AM, Anshum Gupta  wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I’m sanitizing the CHANGES.txt in branch_7_0, before cutting the RC. Here
>> are a couple of conflicting CHANGES.txt entries:
>> 
>> - SOLR-11128: Entry in 'Other changes' on branch_7_0 , but in 'Other
>> changes' on master (Varun, Ishan)
>> - SOLR-10821: Mention in master (7.0 section) but not in branch_7_0 (Noble,
>> Cassandra, Shalin)
>> 
>> I am going to add the entry for SOLR-10821 on branch_7_0, and move the entry
>> to the bug fix section on master for SOLR-11228.
>> 
>> If the committers involved here think that isn’t apt, let me know or feel
>> free to fix it.
>> 
>> Getting the RC generally takes a few tries, and I’m also helping Varun with
>> the RC build for 6.6.1, so all of you would have more than a few hours for
>> this :).
>> 
>> -Anshum
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> Shalin Shekhar Mangar.
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
> 

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Anshum Gupta]

I also found more issues when comparing 7x, with 6x this time. I’ll take a look 
at wether it’s just the CHANGES entries or have these actually missed the 
branch. I assume it’s just the CHANGES, but want to be sure. If the committers 
involved can pitch in, I’d appreciate, else I’ll work on this for a bit right 
now and continue with this tomorrow morning.

- SOLR-10477 (Ab)
- SOLR-10631: Metric reporters leak on 6x. (Ab)
- SOLR-10718: Shawn Feldman, Hrishikesh Gadre, janhoy, Jason Gerlowski via 
Ishan Chattopadhyaya)
- SOLR-10586 (janhoy)
- SOLR-10587 (janhoy)
- SOLR-1 (Ab)

I don’t think we’re missing any commits after this as I’ve now compared both 6x 
with 7.0, and master with 7.0.

-Anshum



> On Aug 22, 2017, at 10:50 PM, Anshum Gupta  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I’m sanitizing the CHANGES.txt in branch_7_0, before cutting the RC. Here are 
> a couple of conflicting CHANGES.txt entries:
> 
> - SOLR-11128: Entry in 'Other changes' on branch_7_0 , but in 'Other changes' 
> on master (Varun, Ishan)
> - SOLR-10821: Mention in master (7.0 section) but not in branch_7_0 (Noble, 
> Cassandra, Shalin)
> 
> I am going to add the entry for SOLR-10821 on branch_7_0, and move the entry 
> to the bug fix section on master for SOLR-11228. 
> 
> If the committers involved here think that isn’t apt, let me know or feel 
> free to fix it.
> 
> Getting the RC generally takes a few tries, and I’m also helping Varun with 
> the RC build for 6.6.1, so all of you would have more than a few hours for 
> this :).
> 
> -Anshum
> 
> 
> 

Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[Shalin Shekhar Mangar]

Hi Anshum,

I've added SOLR-10821 to the CHANGES.txt on both branch_7x and branch_7_0

On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 11:20 AM, Anshum Gupta  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I’m sanitizing the CHANGES.txt in branch_7_0, before cutting the RC. Here
> are a couple of conflicting CHANGES.txt entries:
>
> - SOLR-11128: Entry in 'Other changes' on branch_7_0 , but in 'Other
> changes' on master (Varun, Ishan)
> - SOLR-10821: Mention in master (7.0 section) but not in branch_7_0 (Noble,
> Cassandra, Shalin)
>
> I am going to add the entry for SOLR-10821 on branch_7_0, and move the entry
> to the bug fix section on master for SOLR-11228.
>
> If the committers involved here think that isn’t apt, let me know or feel
> free to fix it.
>
> Getting the RC generally takes a few tries, and I’m also helping Varun with
> the RC build for 6.6.1, so all of you would have more than a few hours for
> this :).
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>



-- 
Regards,
Shalin Shekhar Mangar.

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