Re: Oak Jenkins build takes up too many resources

t; > Konrad > > > > > On 14. Nov 2022, at 16:16, Marcel Reutegger > > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > On 11.11.22, 15:11, "Robert Munteanu" wrote: > > > > I think it would be worthile to check if the build c

Oak Jenkins build takes up too many resources

Hi, I was waiting for a small PR of mine in Sling to be built by Jenkins and I saw that it was not picked for some time. Looking at the executing jobs I noticed that there were many, different, Oak stages being ran. A sample PR check [1] shows that there are many stages (one per module?) but

Re: Oak-it-osgi module

opment/testing-paxexam.html > [1]: https://github.com/apache/sling-org-apache-sling-testing-paxexam > > > > From: Robert Munteanu > Date: Tuesday, 18 January 2022 at 17:44 > To: oak-dev@jackrabbit.apache.org  > Subject: Re: Oak-it-osgi module > On Tue, 2022-01-18 at 16:38 +,

Re: Oak-it-osgi module

On Tue, 2022-01-18 at 16:38 +, Carlo Jelmini wrote: > Up until now, I have used AEM Quickstart to manually test Oak > changes, but the roundtrip is very slow, cumbersome, and > frustrating... Well, it's probably much quicker if you use the Sling Starter. On that note, maybe Oak itself can be

Re: Oak-it-osgi module

Hi, On Tue, 2022-01-18 at 15:04 +, Angela Schreiber wrote: > Hi Carlo > > In the various security related modules I used > org.apache.sling.testing.osgi-mock to test the OSGi setup. > I never used oak-it-osgi as a base for tests. > In my understanding these are slightly different. The

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.40.0

On Fri, 2021-05-28 at 19:49 +0200, Miroslav Smiljanic wrote: > Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.40.0. +1, with [INFO] [INFO] Apache Maven 3.8.1 (SUSE 3.8.1-2.1) [INFO] OS name: "linux",

Re: [VOTE] Migrate to Git

Hi, On Wed, 2021-05-19 at 09:24 +0200, Konrad Windszus wrote: > After the successful migration of FileVault to Git we should tackle > Oak as well. > I am volunteering to trigger the actual work (mostly on ASF INFRA > side). I hereby propose to > > 1. migrate the SVN repository at >

Re: Getting commit 'origin' in a CommitHook/Editor

Hi Marcel, On Fri, 2020-09-11 at 06:55 +, Marcel Reutegger wrote: > Hi Robert, > > On 10.09.20, 19:01, "Robert Munteanu" wrote: > > I am trying to get commit origin information in an Editor ( well, > > Validator actually ). The scenario is that I

Getting commit 'origin' in a CommitHook/Editor

Hi, I am trying to get commit origin information in an Editor ( well, Validator actually ). The scenario is that I want to log writes to paths that should belong to the immutable mount (/libs, /apps) in a composite setup when preparing. The intercept is done simply to analyse who writes to /libs

Re: [filevault] Installing users and access control entries in the same package

use this configuration from now on. Best regards, Robert > > hope that helps > angela > ________ > From: Robert Munteanu > Sent: Friday, August 21, 2020 6:47 PM > To: oak-dev@jackrabbit.apache.org > Subject: [filevault] Installing users and a

Re: [filevault] Installing users and access control entries in the same package

Hi Kondrad, On Fri, 2020-08-21 at 23:10 +0200, Konrad Windszus wrote: > I would suggest to split it up into two packages and make the ACL > package depend on the user package. You can even put those two > packages into a common container package. The dependencies will > enforce the right

[filevault] Installing users and access control entries in the same package

Hi, I am trying to install a content package that includes: - two users under /home/users/slingshot - content with ACEs that reference the two users under /content/slingshot When installing the content packages I see that the /content entry is processed first, leading to errors like E

Re: [filevault-package-maven-plugin] Packaging additional files in META-INF

Hi Konrad, On Fri, 2020-08-21 at 12:05 +0200, Konrad Windszus wrote: > Hi Robert, > Currently the filevault-package-maven-plugin creates packages from > mainly two different source directories: > >

[filevault-package-maven-plugin] Packaging additional files in META-INF

Hi, I am trying to use the filevault-package-maven-plugin with a Sling project. By default, artifacts are checked to see if they have legal files: META-INF/{LICENSE,NOTICE}. When building a content package these are not included. I've configured the plug-in with: org.apache.jackrabbit

Re: [RT] Limited write support for non-default CompositeNodeStore mounts

On Thu, 2020-07-09 at 15:35 +, Marcel Reutegger wrote: > Hi, > > On 09.07.20, 15:39, "Robert Munteanu" wrote: > > The details are rough and my memory of the implementation is not > > that > > good > > Same here. > > Besides the p

[RT] Limited write support for non-default CompositeNodeStore mounts

Hi, I've been thinking about the read-only aspect of the CNS, and whether it would be useful to relax this constraint. The primary driver (in the Sling world) is that while content packages and repoinit allow easy inspection of the payload so we can know ahead of time if anyone would write to a

Re: Request of (paid) support

Hello Eugenio, On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 14:14 +, Beato Eugenio wrote: > Dear Team, > I'm Eugenio Beato, Manager of the software factory of Siav ( > www.siav.it;). > We're using OAK in our product and we're facing some issues > (performances, indexing on SolR and others). >

Re: Jackrabbit Composite Nodestore Example / Docu

On Mon, 2020-03-30 at 08:36 -0700, Andreas Schaefer wrote: > > I was wondering if there is some further documentation or examples > available than just > https://jackrabbit.apache.org/oak/docs/nodestore/compositens.html tps://jackrabbit.apache.org/oak/docs/nodestore/compositens.html> ? For

Re: Oak doesn't reindex lucene indexes - AsyncIndexUpdate is not ran

Hi David, On Tue, 2020-01-28 at 14:44 +0100, Dawid Cokan wrote: > Hi all, > > We built application using OSGi framework and we use the jackrabbit > oak > 1.6.17 to store some content. We have just enabled lucene indexes for > full > text search. We configured them accordingly to documentation

Re: [Jenkins] Oak Windows build

On Thu, 2019-09-12 at 13:52 +0200, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 12.09.2019 09:47, Robert Munteanu wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Some time ago I set up a windows build for Oak > > > >https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit-Oak-Windows/ > > > > I noticed

[Jenkins] Oak Windows build

Hi, Some time ago I set up a windows build for Oak https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit-Oak-Windows/ I noticed that it's still running, passing most of time. The build is relatively stable and I was wondering if it would be useful to make it an 'official' build and enable notifications

Configuring Oak for direct binary access

Hi, I'd like to configure Oak for direct binary access (with Azure ideally) to take it for a spin. I've look at https://wiki.apache.org/jackrabbit/Direct%20Binary%20Access and https://jira.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7569 but it's not clear to me how to actually configure Oak to work

Re: [DISCUSS] Branching and release: version numbers

On Mon, 2019-03-04 at 13:24 +, Davide Giannella wrote: > On 04/03/2019 12:08, Robert Munteanu wrote: > > It all sounds reasonable to me. One comment regarding your example > > - > > branching does not necessarily force to increase the major > > component of >

Re: [DISCUSS] Branching and release: version numbers

Hi Davide, On Fri, 2019-03-01 at 09:48 +, Davide Giannella wrote: > Now let's say we have to branch at 1.26 time we would create a branch > `svn/.../branches/1.26` that will produce thereafter 1.26.0, 1.26.1, > etc. > > Trunk will become: 2.0, 2.2, 2.4, 2.6, etc. It all sounds reasonable to

Re: [DISCUSS] branching and release strategies

On Wed, 2019-02-20 at 14:54 +, Marcel Reutegger wrote: > Hi, > > On 20.02.19, 13:21, "Robert Munteanu" wrote: > > On Wed, 2019-02-20 at 10:45 +, Davide Giannella wrote: > > > - Any previous oak release will be automatically deprecated. What >

Re: [DISCUSS] branching and release strategies

Hi, On Wed, 2019-02-20 at 10:45 +, Davide Giannella wrote: > - Any previous oak release will be automatically deprecated. What has > been already branched and released still stays there. This applies > only > to future releases. So say we release 1.12 from trunk and then 1.12.1 from trunk.

Re: [Monitoring] - Provisioning StatisticsProvider in Oak

On Wed, 2018-11-28 at 11:34 +0100, Francesco Mari wrote: > On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 at 11:45, Tommaso Teofili < > tommaso.teof...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > After having dig into the code for a while I can see following > options: > > - have a dedicated OSGi service on the query side that can be then >

Re: Oak Composite Store

Hi Rory, On Fri, 2018-11-02 at 10:47 +1100, Rory Elrick wrote: > Hi, > > I am interested in using the Oak Composite Store but am having a hard > time > finding any detailed information or examples of usage. > > I have built release 1.8.9 of the oak-store-composite module and read > the >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.8.8

On Tue, 2018-09-25 at 11:33 +0100, Davide Giannella wrote: > Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.8.8. +1, with [INFO] [INFO] Apache Maven 3.5.4 (1edded0938998edf8bf061f1ceb3cfdeccf443fe;

[m12n] Modularised module releases in Oak

Hi, During the Oakathon we've been discussing the possibility of switching to individual module releases. I've gathered the notes at [1] and would like to gather input from the wider oak-dev audience. So please go through the wiki page and reply to the list with any comments/criticisms and

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.8.6

On Tue, 2018-07-31 at 17:47 +0200, Manfred Baedke wrote: > Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.8.6. +1, with [INFO] [INFO] Apache Maven 3.5.4 (1edded0938998edf8bf061f1ceb3cfdeccf443fe;

Re: [DISCUSS] Enabling CI for Oak cloud-based features

On Tue, 2018-07-31 at 13:49 +0530, Chetan Mehrotra wrote: > For Azure specific services we would need to > get an account created and use that from our Jenkins server. I know Tomek has been using azurite [1] with some success ( although not 100% perfect ). Robert [1]:

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.9.5

On Tue, 2018-07-03 at 13:20 +0100, Davide Giannella wrote: > Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.9.5. +1 where [INFO] [INFO] Apache Maven 3.5.3 (3383c37e1f9e9b3bc3df5050c29c8aff9f295297;

Re: Jenkins failures

On Wed, 2018-04-11 at 09:39 +0200, Julian Reschke wrote: > Hi, > > seems that many of our builds fail on "H20", see > . > > > [ERROR] Failed to execute goal org.codehaus.mojo:animal-sniffer- > > maven-plugin:1.16:check (animal-sniffer) on project

Re: Recommending Oak over Jackrabbit 2.x

On Tue, 2018-02-27 at 12:21 -0500, Matt Ryan wrote: > Are there use cases where users should prefer Jackrabbit over Oak? > Or is > Oak considered a full replacement for Jackrabbit in every case? My understanding is that Jackrabbit is a reference implementation of the spec, with all bells and

Recommending Oak over Jackrabbit 2.x

Hi, Recent questions to the jackrabbit user's list lead me to believe that users are still picking Jackrabbit 2.x as a first implementation choice. I believe that we should be pointing them to Oak instead, as that's (IMO) the better documented, supported and implemented version of a JCR

JDK 11 EA builds

Hi, JDK 11 builds are our, in case someone wants to do some early testing. http://jdk.java.net/11/ Robert

Re: OAK-7203 - Where should MountInfoProviderService reside?

On Tue, 2018-02-13 at 15:29 +0100, Oliver Lietz wrote: > On Tuesday 13 February 2018 14:37:29 Alex Deparvu wrote: > > Hi, > > Hi, > > > I would not move it to oak-core, it would be (I think) a step in > > the wrong > > direction wrt. the modularization effort. > > seriously, which direction is

Re: OAK-7203 - Where should MountInfoProviderService reside?

d. Thanks, Robert > > > best, > alex > > > > > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:46 PM, Robert Munteanu <romb...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > On Tue, 2018-02-13 at 13:04 +0100, Oliver Lietz wrote: > > > On Tuesday 13 February 2018 13:10:23 Robert Munte

Re: OAK-7203 - Where should MountInfoProviderService reside?

On Tue, 2018-02-13 at 13:04 +0100, Oliver Lietz wrote: > On Tuesday 13 February 2018 13:10:23 Robert Munteanu wrote: > > On Tue, 2018-02-13 at 11:51 +0100, Oliver Lietz wrote: > > > > 1. Move the service to oak-core. > > > > 2. Require oak-store-composite for depl

Re: OAK-7203 - Where should MountInfoProviderService reside?

On Tue, 2018-02-13 at 11:51 +0100, Oliver Lietz wrote: > > 1. Move the service to oak-core. > > 2. Require oak-store-composite for deployments > > > > If we go with 1, we have simpler deployments ( one less bundle ). > > If we > > go with 2, we split the logic from the oak-store-composite bundle

OAK-7203 - Where should MountInfoProviderService reside?

Hi, In OAK-7203 [1] we're discussing the best location for the MountInfoProviderService. The context is that due to the addition of the mounts concept a MountInfoProvider implementation is required and for OSGi deployment we have to add oak-store-composite. There are two options here: 1. Move

[Fwd: Jenkins build is still unstable: Jackrabbit-Oak-Windows #110]

Hi, We have gathered some failures on Windows ( 11 tests failing now ). org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.run.osgi.DocumentNodeStoreConfigTest.testRDBDocumentStoreRestart org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.run.osgi.RepositoryShutdownTest.multipleShutdownAndWait

Intent to backport OAK-7136 to 1.8

Hi, I intent to backport OAK-7136 to the 1.8 stable branch. The fixes are basically moving the metatype.properties files in the right directory, so I expect zero issues. Thanks, Robert

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.8.0

On Tue, 2018-01-09 at 11:53 +, Davide Giannella wrote: > Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.8.0. +1 > [INFO] > > [INFO] Apache Maven 3.5.2 (138edd61fd100ec658bfa2d307c43b76940a5d7d; >

Re: [windows] Jenkins test failure - o.a.j.o.index.indexer.document.flatfile.FlatFileStoreTest.basicTest

On Fri, 2017-12-22 at 06:07 +0530, Vikas Saurabh wrote: > Hi Robert, > > > I am not able to qualify whether this is a valid failure or not, > > therefore I'm bringing it to the mailing list. > > > > That should be independent of OS... for me, following failed: > MAVEN_OPTS='-Xmx512m -Xms512m'

[windows] Jenkins test failure - o.a.j.o.index.indexer.document.flatfile.FlatFileStoreTest.basicTest

Hi, The org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.index.indexer.document.flatfile.FlatFileStore Test.basicTest has failed for the past 2 runs on the Windows build job: https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit-Oak-Windows/lastBuild/org.apac he.jackrabbit$oak-

Re: Experimental build for Oak on Windows

On Wed, 2017-12-06 at 13:48 +0200, Robert Munteanu wrote: > I'll keep it alive for a couple of weeks to assess its stability, and > then we can discuss whether we want to promote it to a 'proper' job > that we actually pay attention to and that sends notifications. The builds have starte

Re: Build failure due to out of heap in oak-solr

On Fri, 2017-12-15 at 12:52 +0100, Michael Dürig wrote: > We shouldn't add any memory setting in the Jenins jobs but rely on > the > test.opts.memory property of the parent pom.xml. This is > intentionally > set to 512M so we find out about potential regressions early. That's interesting. So if

Re: Build failure due to out of heap in oak-solr

On Fri, 2017-12-15 at 15:18 +0530, Chetan Mehrotra wrote: > > Caused by: java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space > > The build is failing due to OOM in oak-solr-core > https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/1090/ FWIW, the windows build does not fail ( yay?)

Re: Supported JVMs

Hi Davide, On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 11:27 +, Davide Giannella wrote: > Good morning, > > while looking at http://jackrabbit.apache.org/jcr/downloads.html I > can > see that we have a sort-of matrix for supported jvms. > > However stating something like _Java 7 and later_ implies that we run >

Re: Experimental build for Oak on Windows

On Tue, 2017-12-12 at 23:00 +0100, Julian Reschke wrote: > > java.nio.file.InvalidPathException: Illegal char <:> at index 2: > > /F:/jenkins/jenkins-slave/workspace/Jackrabbit-Oak-Windows/oak- > > solr- > > core/target/test-classes/solr > > > > Not sure who can look into this, but it would be

Re: Experimental build for Oak on Windows

On Wed, 2017-12-06 at 13:48 +0200, Robert Munteanu wrote: > Hi, > > I set up yesterday an experimental build for Oak on Windows > > https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit-Oak-Windows/ > I've switched from Git to SVN since Git sync seems to be problematic lately. With

Experimental build for Oak on Windows

Hi, I set up yesterday an experimental build for Oak on Windows https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit-Oak-Windows/ It _seems_ to be working fine, but I've marked it as experimental given the historical stability issues with ASF Windows bots. Feel free to double-check with it in case you

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.6.7

On Tue, 2017-11-28 at 10:15 +0100, Davide Giannella wrote: > Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.6.7. [INFO] [INFO] Apache Maven 3.5.2 (138edd61fd100ec658bfa2d307c43b76940a5d7d;

Re: [m12n] Module oak-spi-core defines no export versions

On Tue, 2017-11-14 at 13:51 +, Angela Schreiber wrote: > Any preference wrt the initial version number? The initial version number should be 1.0.0 IMO. Robert

Re: Naming convention for unstable releases

On Tue, 2017-10-17 at 07:28 +0200, Julian Reschke wrote: > Should we consider to label them accordingly in the future? Such as > >1.9.0-EXPERIMENTAL I'm +0 on such a change as I would expect users to actually read the fine web pages at [1]. If we go through with this, I'd to with something

Re: Oak Bundle versioning.

On Fri, 2017-10-06 at 15:06 +0100, Ian Boston wrote: > Hi, > > On 6 October 2017 at 15:02, Robert Munteanu <romb...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > Hi Ian, > > > > Thanks for starting the discussion. I think this can be one of the > > big > &g

Re: Oak Bundle versioning.

Hi Ian, Thanks for starting the discussion. I think this can be one of the big benefits of modularising Oak and I am interested in seeing this being done. As you mentioned, it becomes easier to integrate various Oak changes, especially for consumers only depending on stable APIs. On Thu,

Waiting for an async index to be updated

Hi, In Sling we have some tests which validate that full text search is working. Occasionaly this test times out because the full-text lucene index is not updated and a traversal query is used. More details at [1]. We should probably add a way of waiting for the index to be updated, so my

Switch to official OSGi component and metatype annotations

Hi, You might've noticed that we've begun migrating to the OSGi R6 annotations. The biggest reason for this switch - besides moving to the latest and greatest and from proprietary to standard - is using the declarative services spec 1.3, see [1] for highlights. There's a good write-up about the

Re: Debugging oak-pojosr test failures

bbit/oak/standalone/WebCons > oleSupport.java > > > On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Robert Munteanu <romb...@apache.org> > wrote: > > Hi Chetan, > > > > On Wed, 2017-09-27 at 15:48 +0530, Chetan Mehrotra wrote: > > > Hi Robert, > > > >

Debugging oak-pojosr test failures

Hi, I am trying out some changes to the OSGi annotations based on Julian's work and I'm getting test failures in oak-pojosr, for instance [INFO] Running org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.run.osgi.RepositoryClosedTest [ERROR] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 61.084 s <<<

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.7.8

On Mon, 2017-09-25 at 21:15 +0100, Davide Giannella wrote: > Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.7.8. +1 Robert signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: chroot-like content segregation?

Hi Tomek, On Fri, 2017-09-22 at 05:03 +, Tomek Rekawek wrote: > Hello Bertrand, > > this seems like an opposite of the composite node store - rather than > combining multiple repositories together, we’re trying to split one > repository into many jails. Maybe I’m too optimistic, but I think

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.7.7

On Mon, 2017-09-11 at 14:12 +0100, Davide Giannella wrote: > Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.7.7. +1 Robert signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Test-only utility for dumping the repository?

Hi Alex, On Thu, 2017-08-31 at 16:50 +0200, Alex Deparvu wrote: > Hi Robert, > > Have you tried NodeStateUtils#toString? > That looks like exactly what I was looking for, thanks! Robert > > > > > On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Robert Munteanu <romb...@

Test-only utility for dumping the repository?

Hi, When I have a test issue that relies on inspecting the repository I usually write a small method that prints the contents of the repository. Today, as I wrote that method for the third time, I was wondering whether we should add it to test-only utility class. The problem with that is that

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.4.18

On Wed, 2017-08-30 at 11:23 +0200, Davide Giannella wrote: > Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Jackrabbit Oak > 1.4.18. +1 Robert signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: svn commit: r1806602 - in /jackrabbit/oak/trunk/oak-jcr/src: main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/jcr/repository/ main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/jcr/session/ test/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oa

On Tue, 2017-08-29 at 21:03 -0700, Chetan Mehrotra wrote: > + > +Tracker tracker = > whiteboard.track(MountInfoProvider.class); > +List services = tracker.getServices(); > +tracker.stop(); > + > +if ( services.isEmpty() ) > +this.mountInfoProvider =

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.7.6

On Tue, 2017-08-22 at 12:22 +0530, Amit Jain wrote: > Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.7.6. +1 Robert signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.0.39

On Tue, 2017-08-15 at 20:25 +0200, Manfred Baedke wrote: > Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Jackrabbit Oak > 1.0.39. +1 Robert signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.6.4

On Wed, 2017-08-16 at 10:15 +0530, Amit Jain wrote: > Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.6.4. +1 Robert signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: BUILD FAILURE: Jackrabbit Oak - Build # 615 - Still Failing

This is issue https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14804 . I have disabled the Jira post-build step, just to get the builds going. Just to make sure I don't forget, the following settings will be reapplied once the INFRA issue is sorted out: - Jira project key: OAK - Description of test:

Re: BUILD FAILURE: Jackrabbit Oak - Build # 602 - Still Failing

Jenkins was restarted recently and plugins upgraded. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14798 You might want to file an INFRA issue if this persists. robert On Mon, 2017-08-07 at 10:55 +0200, Alex Deparvu wrote: > looks infra related: > > [INFO] BUILD SUCCESS > > channel

[composite] Detecting values present in multiple indexes

Hi, I working on OAK-6505 [0] which will check, in a composite setup, whether a unique index provided by multiple mounts is consistent. That is, if the entries are unique for all index 'fragments' provided by mounts, e.g. /oak:index /uuid [ default mount index ] /oak:mount-private /uuid

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.4.17

On Mon, 2017-07-17 at 12:00 +0100, Davide Giannella wrote: > Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Jackrabbit Oak > 1.4.17. +1 Robert signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Pedantic build failure - oak-jcr/derby.log license check

Hi Alex, On Fri, 2017-07-14 at 11:02 +0200, Alex Deparvu wrote: > Hi Robert, > > I tested this and I don't see the same error. I do see a derby.log > file being created in target/ which is fine from the license check > pov. > Where are you running the command from exactly (project root, oak- >

Pedantic build failure - oak-jcr/derby.log license check

Hi, Does anyone else get build failures when running $ mvn clean install -Ppedantic ? There is a derby.log file in oak-jcr which does not have a license header ( obviously ). I can add a rat check exclusion but I'm curious to see if anyone else gets this. Thanks, Robert

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.6.2

On Mon, 2017-06-12 at 15:32 +0100, Davide Giannella wrote: > Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.6.2. +1 Robert signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.7.1

On Tue, 2017-06-06 at 13:27 +0100, Davide Giannella wrote: > Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.7.1. +1 Robert signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Running javadoc as part of standard build.

Hi Davide, On Mon, 2017-06-05 at 12:18 +0100, Davide Giannella wrote: > Hello team, > > I'm currently trying to release 1.7.1 and it's failing on javadocs > (again). > > I'm trying to find a way to run the javadoc at least at the same time > of > the IT, otherwise we won't catch any failures up

Re: Oakathon: Oak Hackathon

On Wed, 2017-05-24 at 21:47 +0200, Michael Dürig wrote: > > > > The page is marked as ImmutablePage to me so I can't edit it. > > Username > > is RobertMunteanu. > > I added you contributor: > https://wiki.apache.org/jackrabbit/ContributorsGroup. Should work > now. It does, thank you. Robert

API changes in unstable branches (was: [VOTE] Release Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.7.0)

Hi, On Thu, 2017-05-25 at 12:08 +0100, Davide Giannella wrote: > On 24/05/2017 19:33, Robert Munteanu wrote: > > Is there a chance to delay this release and include > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6265 > > Nope. We already cut and it's under vote

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.7.0

On Thu, 2017-05-25 at 12:08 +0100, Davide Giannella wrote: > On 24/05/2017 19:33, Robert Munteanu wrote: > > Is there a chance to delay this release and include > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6265 > > Nope. We already cut and it's under vote

Re: Oakathon: Oak Hackathon

Hi, On Wed, 2017-05-24 at 11:17 +0200, Michael Dürig wrote: > Hi, > > We are going to hold an Oak Hackathon in Basel, Switzerland from > August > 21st to August 25th. This is a developers workshop with the goal to > advance the overall state of Oak by fixing bugs, implementing new > features

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.7.0

Hi, Is there a chance to delay this release and include https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6265 ? I would like to remove two methods introduced in o.a.j.o.spi.mount.Mounts, which can be safely done until we cut the first release. If it's not possible I'll leave them as deprecated,

Re: upgrade repository structure with backward-incompatible changes

On Wed, 2017-05-17 at 09:37 +, Michael Marth wrote: > Hi Marco, > > Maybe I don’t understand correctly your use case, but would it be > easier to simply write a script using the JCR API to do the changes > in the repo? > > Michael For bulk operations like that Sling Pipes is also an

Re: new name for the multiplexing node store

seful on their own. > > Cheers > Dominik > > Am 05.05.2017 20:40 schrieb "Robert Munteanu" <romb...@apache.org>: > > Hi, > > On Fri, 2017-05-05 at 07:18 -0600, Matt Ryan wrote: > > I was wondering about this also WRT federated data store.  If the

Re: BUILD FAILURE: Jackrabbit Oak - Build # 261 - Failure

On Mon, 2017-05-08 at 13:12 +0200, Alex Parvulescu wrote: > Hi, > > This looks odd [0], builds takes 49 mins, doesn't fail, but it still > times-out at 60. > > alex > > > [0] > [INFO] BUILD SUCCESS > [INFO] > --- > - > [INFO]

Re: new name for the multiplexing node store

Hi, On Fri, 2017-05-05 at 07:18 -0600, Matt Ryan wrote: > I was wondering about this also WRT federated data store.  If the > intent > and effect of both are the same ("both" meaning what is currently > called > the "multiplexing node store" and the proposed (and in-progress) > "federated > data

OAK-6050 - Unify used version of osgi-mock

Hi, I have a patch attached to OAK-6050 [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6050 Nothing earth-shattering, but it adds a bit more consistency and makes Eclipse happier. It would be great if someone could take a look and review. Robert

Re: OAK-6089 (maven plugin updates) and OAK-5664 (require Java 8), also: move to Maven 3.3.9?

Hi Julian, On Thu, 2017-04-20 at 15:43 +0200, Julian Reschke wrote: > Hi there, > > in preparation of the switch to Java 8, I have updated lots of maven  > plugin dependencies and also explicitly required the use of Maven > 3.2.1  > (this is the version we use in CI, and was apparently was also

Re: [m12n] Location of InitialContent

On Thu, 2017-04-20 at 08:07 +, Angela Schreiber wrote: > hi > > the original intention of the 'InitialContent' was just to registers > built-in JCR node types, which explains it's location in > org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.nodetype.write > > in the mean time it has a evolved to

Re: [m12n] A new home for ApproximateCounter, NodeUtil and TreeUtil?

fore moving it > > > to a > > > package that already has semantic versioning enabled (in contrast > > > to > > > the > > > util package where they currently are located). > > > > > > wdyt? > > > > (Sorry, missed this somehow)

Re: [m12n] A new home for ApproximateCounter, NodeUtil and TreeUtil?

moving it to a > package that already has semantic versioning enabled (in contrast to > the > util package where they currently are located). > > wdyt? (Sorry, missed this somehow) Yes, holding on for now sounds good to me. Thanks, Robert > > Kind regards > Angela >

Re: [m12n] A new home for ApproximateCounter, NodeUtil and TreeUtil?

: > Hi Robert > > plugins.tree would feel natural to me. > regarding the export: not sure about that either... the plugins.tree > has > some unfortunate dependencies e.g. to oak.core. so probably more work > ahead in that area. > > kind regards > angela > > On 06/

Re: [m12] Effort to Improve Modularisation of Oak

Hi Matt, On Thu, 2017-04-13 at 09:07 -0600, Matt Ryan wrote: > Great work so far to everyone involved in this effort. > > I'm under the impression that this refactoring will constitute a > change in > the public API contract of Oak.  In reading the links it seems to > hint at > this but whether

Re: Module to host oak-run console scripts

On Thu, 2017-04-13 at 15:03 +0530, Chetan Mehrotra wrote: > On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Marcel Reutegger > wrote: > > one concern I have is maintainability. Scripts tend to go out of > > date and my > > question would be how we can detect this when it happens. > > Yes

Re: possible to graft a remote non-JCR source to a path?

Hi, On Wed, 2017-04-12 at 15:31 +, Beaudet, David wrote: > Thanks Roy, yes that's the other suggestion Adobe had identified and > we're looking at it as well.  In your opinion is integration of DAM > Assets at the JCR level with Oak just a bad idea even if it is > possible? With the

  1   2   >