[jira] [Commented] (PYLUCENE-50) StoredField of an int has the wrong type.

2019-06-17 Thread Andi Vajda (JIRA) 


[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PYLUCENE-50?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16866175#comment-16866175
 ] 

Andi Vajda commented on PYLUCENE-50:


Thank you, Aric, for you reporting this.

Andi..


?? {{field = document.StoredField('', 0)}}


> StoredField of an int has the wrong type.
> -
>
> Key: PYLUCENE-50
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PYLUCENE-50
> Project: PyLucene
>  Issue Type: Bug
> Environment: Python 3 official docker container, 8.1.1rc
>Reporter: A. Coady
>Priority: Critical
>
> The StoredField constructor is interpreting ints as bytes.  It's only 
> reproducing on the 8 rc.
> {{import lucene}}
>  {{lucene.initVM()}}
>  {{from org.apache.lucene import document}}
>   
>  {{field = document.StoredField('', 0)}}
>  {{print(field.numericValue(), field.binaryValue())}}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

Re: [VOTE] Release PyLucene 8.1.1

2019-06-17 Thread Andi Vajda 



The release vote has now been called off due to PYLUCENE-50.

Andi..

On Mon, 17 Jun 2019, Andi Vajda wrote:



On Mon, 17 Jun 2019, David Allouche wrote:


On 17 Jun 2019, at 20:42, Andi Vajda  wrote:


On Mon, 17 Jun 2019, David Allouche wrote:


Thank you, that was very informative.

+0 for this release, I builds and pass my test suite.

But I was unable to make a complete integration test because I do not 
have a proper index format migration infrastructure and my index is made 
of incompletely-upgraded lucene6 and lucene7 segments.


So far, you're the only one who has cast a vote.
No one else, no PMC member, none of the longtime users, no one.


Marc Jeurissen did +1.


Oops, I missed this message. It is in my inbox, however.
My bad.
Milo just voted +0.

So, after the vote being open for a week, we have:
 - one +1 vote (Marc's)
 - two +0 votes (yours and Milo's)
 - one +1 PMC vote (mine)

For a release to happen, we need two more PMC votes.

Andi..

Message-Id: 
<5cff4939.1c69fb81.2d212.8174smtpin_added_miss...@mx.google.com>


And since you posted your message, Milo H Fields III did +0.

So there _is_ interest.

I do have a long-term need for PyLucene, but I really just need one release 
per major version to have an index upgrade path. But it seems like Lucene 
Core make major releases quite frequently nowadays.

[jira] [Commented] (PYLUCENE-50) StoredField of an int has the wrong type.

2019-06-17 Thread Andi Vajda (JIRA) 


[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PYLUCENE-50?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16866171#comment-16866171
 ] 

Andi Vajda commented on PYLUCENE-50:


For the longest time, it was possible to pass an int where a byte was expected. 
This overlap was intentional and, probably, for convenience. The fix to 
PYLUCENE-47 changed the order in which signatures were considered and may have 
caused this long latent bug to now bite.
To fix this, I removed the overlap. To pass a byte, use b'x'.


> StoredField of an int has the wrong type.
> -
>
> Key: PYLUCENE-50
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PYLUCENE-50
> Project: PyLucene
>  Issue Type: Bug
> Environment: Python 3 official docker container, 8.1.1rc
>Reporter: A. Coady
>Priority: Critical
>
> The StoredField constructor is interpreting ints as bytes.  It's only 
> reproducing on the 8 rc.
> {{import lucene}}
>  {{lucene.initVM()}}
>  {{from org.apache.lucene import document}}
>   
>  {{field = document.StoredField('', 0)}}
>  {{print(field.numericValue(), field.binaryValue())}}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

[jira] [Resolved] (PYLUCENE-50) StoredField of an int has the wrong type.

2019-06-17 Thread Andi Vajda (JIRA) 


 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PYLUCENE-50?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Andi Vajda resolved PYLUCENE-50.

Resolution: Fixed

fixed in rev 1861553

> StoredField of an int has the wrong type.
> -
>
> Key: PYLUCENE-50
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PYLUCENE-50
> Project: PyLucene
>  Issue Type: Bug
> Environment: Python 3 official docker container, 8.1.1rc
>Reporter: A. Coady
>Priority: Critical
>
> The StoredField constructor is interpreting ints as bytes.  It's only 
> reproducing on the 8 rc.
> {{import lucene}}
>  {{lucene.initVM()}}
>  {{from org.apache.lucene import document}}
>   
>  {{field = document.StoredField('', 0)}}
>  {{print(field.numericValue(), field.binaryValue())}}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

Re: [jira] [Created] (PYLUCENE-50) StoredField of an int has the wrong type.

2019-06-17 Thread Andi Vajda 


This calls off the vote...

Andi..

On Tue, 18 Jun 2019, A. Coady (JIRA) wrote:


A. Coady created PYLUCENE-50:


Summary: StoredField of an int has the wrong type.
Key: PYLUCENE-50
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PYLUCENE-50
Project: PyLucene
 Issue Type: Bug
Environment: Python 3 official docker container, 8.1.1rc
   Reporter: A. Coady


The StoredField constructor is interpreting ints as bytes.  It's only 
reproducing on the 8 rc.

{{import lucene}}
{{lucene.initVM()}}
{{from org.apache.lucene import document}}


?? {{field = document.StoredField('', 0)}}

{{print(field.numericValue(), field.binaryValue())}}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

[jira] [Created] (PYLUCENE-50) StoredField of an int has the wrong type.

2019-06-17 Thread A. Coady (JIRA) 
A. Coady created PYLUCENE-50:


 Summary: StoredField of an int has the wrong type.
 Key: PYLUCENE-50
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PYLUCENE-50
 Project: PyLucene
  Issue Type: Bug
 Environment: Python 3 official docker container, 8.1.1rc
Reporter: A. Coady


The StoredField constructor is interpreting ints as bytes.  It's only 
reproducing on the 8 rc.

{{import lucene}}
 {{lucene.initVM()}}
 {{from org.apache.lucene import document}}
  
 {{field = document.StoredField('', 0)}}
 {{print(field.numericValue(), field.binaryValue())}}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

Re: [VOTE] Release PyLucene 8.1.1

2019-06-17 Thread Andi Vajda 



On Mon, 17 Jun 2019, David Allouche wrote:


On 17 Jun 2019, at 20:42, Andi Vajda  wrote:


On Mon, 17 Jun 2019, David Allouche wrote:


Thank you, that was very informative.

+0 for this release, I builds and pass my test suite.

But I was unable to make a complete integration test because I do not have a 
proper index format migration infrastructure and my index is made of 
incompletely-upgraded lucene6 and lucene7 segments.


So far, you're the only one who has cast a vote.
No one else, no PMC member, none of the longtime users, no one.


Marc Jeurissen did +1.


Oops, I missed this message. It is in my inbox, however.
My bad.
Milo just voted +0.

So, after the vote being open for a week, we have:
  - one +1 vote (Marc's)
  - two +0 votes (yours and Milo's)
  - one +1 PMC vote (mine)

For a release to happen, we need two more PMC votes.

Andi..


Message-Id: <5cff4939.1c69fb81.2d212.8174smtpin_added_miss...@mx.google.com>

And since you posted your message, Milo H Fields III did +0.

So there _is_ interest.

I do have a long-term need for PyLucene, but I really just need one 
release per major version to have an index upgrade path. But it seems like 
Lucene Core make major releases quite frequently nowadays.

Re: [VOTE] Release PyLucene 8.1.1

2019-06-17 Thread David Allouche 
> On 17 Jun 2019, at 20:42, Andi Vajda  wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mon, 17 Jun 2019, David Allouche wrote:
> 
>> Thank you, that was very informative.
>> 
>> +0 for this release, I builds and pass my test suite.
>> 
>> But I was unable to make a complete integration test because I do not have a 
>> proper index format migration infrastructure and my index is made of 
>> incompletely-upgraded lucene6 and lucene7 segments.
> 
> So far, you're the only one who has cast a vote.
> No one else, no PMC member, none of the longtime users, no one.

Marc Jeurissen did +1.
Message-Id: <5cff4939.1c69fb81.2d212.8174smtpin_added_miss...@mx.google.com>

And since you posted your message, Milo H Fields III did +0.

So there _is_ interest.

I do have a long-term need for PyLucene, but I really just need one release per 
major version to have an index upgrade path. But it seems like Lucene Core make 
major releases quite frequently nowadays.

RE: [VOTE] Release PyLucene 8.1.1

2019-06-17 Thread Milo H Fields III 
+0 (user)


> -Original Message-
> From: Andi Vajda 
> Sent: Monday, June 17, 2019 14:43
> To: pylucene-dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release PyLucene 8.1.1
> 
> 
> On Mon, 17 Jun 2019, David Allouche wrote:
> 
> > Thank you, that was very informative.
> >
> > +0 for this release, I builds and pass my test suite.
> >
> > But I was unable to make a complete integration test because I do not
> > have a proper index format migration infrastructure and my index is
> > made of incompletely-upgraded lucene6 and lucene7 segments.
> 
> So far, you're the only one who has cast a vote.
> No one else, no PMC member, none of the longtime users, no one.
> 
> Besides the Apache procedural aspect, voting is also a gauge of interest
in a
> project. If there is no user interest in the PyLucene project anymore
maybe
> it's time to stop making releases for a while ?
> 
> PyLucene is a bit special in that it doesn't involve many people for
> development since it is machine-generated by JCC and JCC has been stable
> for a while. In that sense, it is important that actual users of PyLucene
make
> themselves known by voting, not much else goes on on the project's mailing
> list or in the source code.
> 
> If there are actual users showing interest by voting here, I feel more
> confortable then in nagging people on the Lucene PMC for their procedural
> vote.
> 
> Andi..
> 
> >
> > I will post my questions about index upgrading on
> > java-u...@lucene.apache.org .
> 
> 
> >
> > Regards.
> >
> >> On 11 Jun 2019, at 16:50, Andi Vajda  wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Jun 11, 2019, at 06:30, David Allouche  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> This is maybe a silly question, but what is the purpose of this voting
> process?
> >>
> >> By the rules of Apache, three PMC binding votes are needed to make a
> release. In addition, it's a gauge of general interest in the project.
> >>
> >>> Is this something required by the project governance?
> >>
> >> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
> >> (see "votes on package releases", in particular)
> >>
> >>> What is the meaning of a vote? Does that mean "I am interested", or
> does it mean "I have tested the latest trunk and it looks good", or
something
> else?
> >>
> >> If you find a bug in the release artifacts (not in the latest trunk)
before the
> release is made, the release is likely to be pulled.
> >>
> >>> What is the typical expected delay for reply? For example, I reserve
> Fridays for technical debt management (including upgrading dependencies),
> so I cannot typically validate a new PyLucene version in less than a week.
> >>
> >> A vote must run for at least 72 hours.
> >> Because you are not on the PMC, your vote falls into the "interest
> gauging" category, is not binding and is considered "best effort".
> >>
> >>> This is probably all common questions with well documented answers. If
> that's the case, then it would be nice to have a link to the answers in
VOTE
> requests.
> >>
> >> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
> >>
> >> Andi..
> >>
> >>>
>  On 11 Jun 2019, at 00:39, Andi Vajda  wrote:
> 
> 
>  The PyLucene 8.1.1 (rc1) release tracking the recent release of
>  Apache Lucene 8.1.1 is ready.
> 
>  A release candidate is available from:
>  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/pylucene/8.1.1-rc1/
> 
>  PyLucene 8.1.1 is built with JCC 3.5, included in these release
artifacts.
> 
>  JCC 3.5 supports Python 3.3+ (in addition to Python 2.3+).
>  PyLucene may be built with Python 2 or Python 3.
> 
>  Please vote to release these artifacts as PyLucene 8.1.1.
>  Anyone interested in this release can and should vote !
> 
>  Thanks !
> 
>  Andi..
> 
>  ps: the KEYS file for PyLucene release signing is at:
>  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/lucene/pylucene/KEYS
>  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/pylucene/KEYS
> 
>  pps: here is my +1
> >>>
> >
> >


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Re: [VOTE] Release PyLucene 8.1.1

2019-06-17 Thread David Allouche 
Thank you, that was very informative.

+0 for this release, I builds and pass my test suite.

But I was unable to make a complete integration test because I do not have a 
proper index format migration infrastructure and my index is made of 
incompletely-upgraded lucene6 and lucene7 segments.

I will post my questions about index upgrading on java-u...@lucene.apache.org 
.

Regards.

> On 11 Jun 2019, at 16:50, Andi Vajda  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Jun 11, 2019, at 06:30, David Allouche  wrote:
>> 
>> This is maybe a silly question, but what is the purpose of this voting 
>> process?
> 
> By the rules of Apache, three PMC binding votes are needed to make a release. 
> In addition, it's a gauge of general interest in the project.
> 
>> Is this something required by the project governance?
> 
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
> (see "votes on package releases", in particular)
> 
>> What is the meaning of a vote? Does that mean "I am interested", or does it 
>> mean "I have tested the latest trunk and it looks good", or something else?
> 
> If you find a bug in the release artifacts (not in the latest trunk) before 
> the release is made, the release is likely to be pulled.
> 
>> What is the typical expected delay for reply? For example, I reserve Fridays 
>> for technical debt management (including upgrading dependencies), so I 
>> cannot typically validate a new PyLucene version in less than a week.
> 
> A vote must run for at least 72 hours.
> Because you are not on the PMC, your vote falls into the "interest gauging" 
> category, is not binding and is considered "best effort".
> 
>> This is probably all common questions with well documented answers. If 
>> that's the case, then it would be nice to have a link to the answers in VOTE 
>> requests.
> 
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
> 
> Andi..
> 
>> 
>>> On 11 Jun 2019, at 00:39, Andi Vajda  wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The PyLucene 8.1.1 (rc1) release tracking the recent release of
>>> Apache Lucene 8.1.1 is ready.
>>> 
>>> A release candidate is available from:
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/pylucene/8.1.1-rc1/
>>> 
>>> PyLucene 8.1.1 is built with JCC 3.5, included in these release artifacts.
>>> 
>>> JCC 3.5 supports Python 3.3+ (in addition to Python 2.3+).
>>> PyLucene may be built with Python 2 or Python 3.
>>> 
>>> Please vote to release these artifacts as PyLucene 8.1.1.
>>> Anyone interested in this release can and should vote !
>>> 
>>> Thanks !
>>> 
>>> Andi..
>>> 
>>> ps: the KEYS file for PyLucene release signing is at:
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/lucene/pylucene/KEYS
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/pylucene/KEYS
>>> 
>>> pps: here is my +1
>>