You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@couchdb.apache.org by Benoit Chesneau <bc...@gmail.com> on 2012/03/01 00:21:57 UTC
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release, second round
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 7:30 PM, Benoit Chesneau <bc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 4:39 PM, Benoit Chesneau <bc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 12:28 AM, Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org> wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I would like call a vote for the Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release, second round.
>>>
>>> We encourage the whole community to download and test these
>>> release artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
>>> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so get stuck in!
>>>
>>> We are voting on the following release artifacts:
>>>
>>> http://people.apache.org/~nslater/dist/1.2.0/
>>>
>>>
>>> These artifacts have been built from the following tree-ish in Git:
>>>
>>> 4cd60f3d1683a3445c3248f48ae064fb573db2a1
>>>
>>>
>>> Please follow the test procedure before voting:
>>>
>>> http://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Test_procedure
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you.
>>>
>>> Happy voting,
>>>
>>> N
>>
>> +1 make check &, js tests & signatures ok
>>
>> erlang R14B04 - osx lion & snow leopard, ubuntu 11.04, 11.10, debian 6, fbsd 8.2
>>
>> - benoît
>
> While testing the reported issue I found COUCHDB-1426 which means we
> can't build couchdb with a different spidermonkey lib when another one
> is installed.
>
> I'm now -1 on this release.
>
> Also where can I set the icu lib path now ? The option doesn't appear
> any more in the ./configure command , only for windows.
>
> - benoît
Posted a patch fixing COUCHDB-1426.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-1426
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release, second round
Posted by Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org>.
On Mar 2, 2012, at 17:02 , Noah Slater wrote:
> I think we should, at a minimum:
>
> * Abort this round
> * Land the R15B patch
> * Land COUCHDB-1426 (which seems easy)
> * Start round three
>
> I think we should try to:
>
> * Try to land COUCHDB-1424
> * Get clarification on the performance issues
>
> For these last two items, I think we should impose a time limit. Let's say
> a week.
>
> I think we should also form some teams, to see if we can do some sprints to
> get these issues fixed.
Sounds like a plan, let's go!
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Mar 2, 2012, at 16:47 , Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 16:29, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> Proposed Action:
>>>>
>>>> I'd propose to release 1.2.0 as-is with the following points mentioned
>>>> in the release notes (the exact wording of which is to be done):
>>>>
>>>> 1. Note that this release is incompatible with Erlang R15B. A patch is
>>>> available at [LINK to DIFF]; it will appear in Apache CouchDB 1.2.1.
>>>>
>>>> 2. Also note that there are some reports of a performance regression in
>>>> view building. While initial and ad-hoc tests showed an improvement in
>>>> most cases, we'd like to ask our users to report any significant
>>>> differences to the Apache CouchDB 1.1.1 release.
>>>
>>> While I am usually cheering on the release process, taken together it
>>> seems more prudent to abort this round, take the R15B driver and the
>>> 142{4,6} patches and then starting a new round.
>>
>> I'd agree if 142{4,6} were decided tickets, but they are still ongoing
>> and potentially, in the 24-case especially, for a while.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Jan
>> --
>>
>>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release, second round
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org>.
Thanks!
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On Mar 3, 2012, at 00:31 , Jan Lehnardt wrote:
>
> > Good catch, will do in the morning.
>
> Done.
>
> >
> > Cheers
> > Jan
> > --
> >
> > On 02.03.2012, at 20:00, Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Have you updated NEWS and CHANGES?
> >>
> >> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> On Mar 2, 2012, at 17:28 , Noah Slater wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Vote aborted. Thanks to everyone who took part.
> >>>>
> >>>> Five people have claimed ownership of the five remaining tasks:
> >>>>
> >>>> * Bob Dionne will driving COUCHDB-1424
> >>>> * Benoît Chesneau will be driving COUCHDB-1426
> >>>> * Jan Lehnardt will be driving the R15B patch
> >>>
> >>> √
> >>>
> >>>
> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=couchdb.git;a=commit;h=776aa1d0
> >>>
> >>> Landed in both 1.2.x and master. Thanks to Paul Davis for coming up
> with
> >>> the more canonical C version.
> >>>
> >>> Cheers
> >>> Jan
> >>> --
> >>>
> >>>> * Robert Newson will be driving the performance work
> >>>> * I will be driving round three, obviously
> >>>>
> >>>> Let's kick some ass!
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Robert Newson <rn...@apache.org>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> +1. Abort this, get the fixes we have in and start round 3. The
> >>>>> performance regression issue is elusive, we might, out of necessity,
> >>>>> have to defer action on that until post 1.2.0.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 2 March 2012 16:02, Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org> wrote:
> >>>>>> I think we should, at a minimum:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> * Abort this round
> >>>>>> * Land the R15B patch
> >>>>>> * Land COUCHDB-1426 (which seems easy)
> >>>>>> * Start round three
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I think we should try to:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> * Try to land COUCHDB-1424
> >>>>>> * Get clarification on the performance issues
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> For these last two items, I think we should impose a time limit.
> Let's
> >>>>> say
> >>>>>> a week.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I think we should also form some teams, to see if we can do some
> >>> sprints
> >>>>> to
> >>>>>> get these issues fixed.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Mar 2, 2012, at 16:47 , Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 16:29, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Proposed Action:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I'd propose to release 1.2.0 as-is with the following points
> >>>>> mentioned
> >>>>>>>>> in the release notes (the exact wording of which is to be done):
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> 1. Note that this release is incompatible with Erlang R15B. A
> patch
> >>>>> is
> >>>>>>>>> available at [LINK to DIFF]; it will appear in Apache CouchDB
> 1.2.1.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> 2. Also note that there are some reports of a performance
> regression
> >>>>> in
> >>>>>>>>> view building. While initial and ad-hoc tests showed an
> improvement
> >>>>> in
> >>>>>>>>> most cases, we'd like to ask our users to report any significant
> >>>>>>>>> differences to the Apache CouchDB 1.1.1 release.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> While I am usually cheering on the release process, taken
> together it
> >>>>>>>> seems more prudent to abort this round, take the R15B driver and
> the
> >>>>>>>> 142{4,6} patches and then starting a new round.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I'd agree if 142{4,6} were decided tickets, but they are still
> ongoing
> >>>>>>> and potentially, in the 24-case especially, for a while.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Cheers
> >>>>>>> Jan
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release, second round
Posted by Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org>.
On Mar 3, 2012, at 00:31 , Jan Lehnardt wrote:
> Good catch, will do in the morning.
Done.
>
> Cheers
> Jan
> --
>
> On 02.03.2012, at 20:00, Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org> wrote:
>
>> Have you updated NEWS and CHANGES?
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Mar 2, 2012, at 17:28 , Noah Slater wrote:
>>>
>>>> Vote aborted. Thanks to everyone who took part.
>>>>
>>>> Five people have claimed ownership of the five remaining tasks:
>>>>
>>>> * Bob Dionne will driving COUCHDB-1424
>>>> * Benoît Chesneau will be driving COUCHDB-1426
>>>> * Jan Lehnardt will be driving the R15B patch
>>>
>>> √
>>>
>>> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=couchdb.git;a=commit;h=776aa1d0
>>>
>>> Landed in both 1.2.x and master. Thanks to Paul Davis for coming up with
>>> the more canonical C version.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Jan
>>> --
>>>
>>>> * Robert Newson will be driving the performance work
>>>> * I will be driving round three, obviously
>>>>
>>>> Let's kick some ass!
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Robert Newson <rn...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +1. Abort this, get the fixes we have in and start round 3. The
>>>>> performance regression issue is elusive, we might, out of necessity,
>>>>> have to defer action on that until post 1.2.0.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2 March 2012 16:02, Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org> wrote:
>>>>>> I think we should, at a minimum:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * Abort this round
>>>>>> * Land the R15B patch
>>>>>> * Land COUCHDB-1426 (which seems easy)
>>>>>> * Start round three
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think we should try to:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * Try to land COUCHDB-1424
>>>>>> * Get clarification on the performance issues
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For these last two items, I think we should impose a time limit. Let's
>>>>> say
>>>>>> a week.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think we should also form some teams, to see if we can do some
>>> sprints
>>>>> to
>>>>>> get these issues fixed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mar 2, 2012, at 16:47 , Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 16:29, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Proposed Action:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'd propose to release 1.2.0 as-is with the following points
>>>>> mentioned
>>>>>>>>> in the release notes (the exact wording of which is to be done):
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1. Note that this release is incompatible with Erlang R15B. A patch
>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>> available at [LINK to DIFF]; it will appear in Apache CouchDB 1.2.1.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2. Also note that there are some reports of a performance regression
>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>> view building. While initial and ad-hoc tests showed an improvement
>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>> most cases, we'd like to ask our users to report any significant
>>>>>>>>> differences to the Apache CouchDB 1.1.1 release.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> While I am usually cheering on the release process, taken together it
>>>>>>>> seems more prudent to abort this round, take the R15B driver and the
>>>>>>>> 142{4,6} patches and then starting a new round.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd agree if 142{4,6} were decided tickets, but they are still ongoing
>>>>>>> and potentially, in the 24-case especially, for a while.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release, second round
Posted by Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org>.
Good catch, will do in the morning.
Cheers
Jan
--
On 02.03.2012, at 20:00, Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org> wrote:
> Have you updated NEWS and CHANGES?
>
> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Mar 2, 2012, at 17:28 , Noah Slater wrote:
>>
>>> Vote aborted. Thanks to everyone who took part.
>>>
>>> Five people have claimed ownership of the five remaining tasks:
>>>
>>> * Bob Dionne will driving COUCHDB-1424
>>> * Benoît Chesneau will be driving COUCHDB-1426
>>> * Jan Lehnardt will be driving the R15B patch
>>
>> √
>>
>> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=couchdb.git;a=commit;h=776aa1d0
>>
>> Landed in both 1.2.x and master. Thanks to Paul Davis for coming up with
>> the more canonical C version.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Jan
>> --
>>
>>> * Robert Newson will be driving the performance work
>>> * I will be driving round three, obviously
>>>
>>> Let's kick some ass!
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Robert Newson <rn...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1. Abort this, get the fixes we have in and start round 3. The
>>>> performance regression issue is elusive, we might, out of necessity,
>>>> have to defer action on that until post 1.2.0.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2 March 2012 16:02, Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org> wrote:
>>>>> I think we should, at a minimum:
>>>>>
>>>>> * Abort this round
>>>>> * Land the R15B patch
>>>>> * Land COUCHDB-1426 (which seems easy)
>>>>> * Start round three
>>>>>
>>>>> I think we should try to:
>>>>>
>>>>> * Try to land COUCHDB-1424
>>>>> * Get clarification on the performance issues
>>>>>
>>>>> For these last two items, I think we should impose a time limit. Let's
>>>> say
>>>>> a week.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think we should also form some teams, to see if we can do some
>> sprints
>>>> to
>>>>> get these issues fixed.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mar 2, 2012, at 16:47 , Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 16:29, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Proposed Action:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'd propose to release 1.2.0 as-is with the following points
>>>> mentioned
>>>>>>>> in the release notes (the exact wording of which is to be done):
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1. Note that this release is incompatible with Erlang R15B. A patch
>>>> is
>>>>>>>> available at [LINK to DIFF]; it will appear in Apache CouchDB 1.2.1.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2. Also note that there are some reports of a performance regression
>>>> in
>>>>>>>> view building. While initial and ad-hoc tests showed an improvement
>>>> in
>>>>>>>> most cases, we'd like to ask our users to report any significant
>>>>>>>> differences to the Apache CouchDB 1.1.1 release.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> While I am usually cheering on the release process, taken together it
>>>>>>> seems more prudent to abort this round, take the R15B driver and the
>>>>>>> 142{4,6} patches and then starting a new round.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd agree if 142{4,6} were decided tickets, but they are still ongoing
>>>>>> and potentially, in the 24-case especially, for a while.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release, second round
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org>.
Have you updated NEWS and CHANGES?
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On Mar 2, 2012, at 17:28 , Noah Slater wrote:
>
> > Vote aborted. Thanks to everyone who took part.
> >
> > Five people have claimed ownership of the five remaining tasks:
> >
> > * Bob Dionne will driving COUCHDB-1424
> > * Benoît Chesneau will be driving COUCHDB-1426
> > * Jan Lehnardt will be driving the R15B patch
>
> √
>
> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=couchdb.git;a=commit;h=776aa1d0
>
> Landed in both 1.2.x and master. Thanks to Paul Davis for coming up with
> the more canonical C version.
>
> Cheers
> Jan
> --
>
> > * Robert Newson will be driving the performance work
> > * I will be driving round three, obviously
> >
> > Let's kick some ass!
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Robert Newson <rn...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >> +1. Abort this, get the fixes we have in and start round 3. The
> >> performance regression issue is elusive, we might, out of necessity,
> >> have to defer action on that until post 1.2.0.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2 March 2012 16:02, Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org> wrote:
> >>> I think we should, at a minimum:
> >>>
> >>> * Abort this round
> >>> * Land the R15B patch
> >>> * Land COUCHDB-1426 (which seems easy)
> >>> * Start round three
> >>>
> >>> I think we should try to:
> >>>
> >>> * Try to land COUCHDB-1424
> >>> * Get clarification on the performance issues
> >>>
> >>> For these last two items, I think we should impose a time limit. Let's
> >> say
> >>> a week.
> >>>
> >>> I think we should also form some teams, to see if we can do some
> sprints
> >> to
> >>> get these issues fixed.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mar 2, 2012, at 16:47 , Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 16:29, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>>> Proposed Action:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I'd propose to release 1.2.0 as-is with the following points
> >> mentioned
> >>>>>> in the release notes (the exact wording of which is to be done):
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 1. Note that this release is incompatible with Erlang R15B. A patch
> >> is
> >>>>>> available at [LINK to DIFF]; it will appear in Apache CouchDB 1.2.1.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 2. Also note that there are some reports of a performance regression
> >> in
> >>>>>> view building. While initial and ad-hoc tests showed an improvement
> >> in
> >>>>>> most cases, we'd like to ask our users to report any significant
> >>>>>> differences to the Apache CouchDB 1.1.1 release.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> While I am usually cheering on the release process, taken together it
> >>>>> seems more prudent to abort this round, take the R15B driver and the
> >>>>> 142{4,6} patches and then starting a new round.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'd agree if 142{4,6} were decided tickets, but they are still ongoing
> >>>> and potentially, in the 24-case especially, for a while.
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers
> >>>> Jan
> >>>> --
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release, second round
Posted by Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org>.
On Mar 2, 2012, at 17:28 , Noah Slater wrote:
> Vote aborted. Thanks to everyone who took part.
>
> Five people have claimed ownership of the five remaining tasks:
>
> * Bob Dionne will driving COUCHDB-1424
> * Benoît Chesneau will be driving COUCHDB-1426
> * Jan Lehnardt will be driving the R15B patch
√
http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=couchdb.git;a=commit;h=776aa1d0
Landed in both 1.2.x and master. Thanks to Paul Davis for coming up with
the more canonical C version.
Cheers
Jan
--
> * Robert Newson will be driving the performance work
> * I will be driving round three, obviously
>
> Let's kick some ass!
>
> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Robert Newson <rn...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> +1. Abort this, get the fixes we have in and start round 3. The
>> performance regression issue is elusive, we might, out of necessity,
>> have to defer action on that until post 1.2.0.
>>
>>
>> On 2 March 2012 16:02, Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org> wrote:
>>> I think we should, at a minimum:
>>>
>>> * Abort this round
>>> * Land the R15B patch
>>> * Land COUCHDB-1426 (which seems easy)
>>> * Start round three
>>>
>>> I think we should try to:
>>>
>>> * Try to land COUCHDB-1424
>>> * Get clarification on the performance issues
>>>
>>> For these last two items, I think we should impose a time limit. Let's
>> say
>>> a week.
>>>
>>> I think we should also form some teams, to see if we can do some sprints
>> to
>>> get these issues fixed.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 2, 2012, at 16:47 , Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 16:29, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>> Proposed Action:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd propose to release 1.2.0 as-is with the following points
>> mentioned
>>>>>> in the release notes (the exact wording of which is to be done):
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. Note that this release is incompatible with Erlang R15B. A patch
>> is
>>>>>> available at [LINK to DIFF]; it will appear in Apache CouchDB 1.2.1.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2. Also note that there are some reports of a performance regression
>> in
>>>>>> view building. While initial and ad-hoc tests showed an improvement
>> in
>>>>>> most cases, we'd like to ask our users to report any significant
>>>>>> differences to the Apache CouchDB 1.1.1 release.
>>>>>
>>>>> While I am usually cheering on the release process, taken together it
>>>>> seems more prudent to abort this round, take the R15B driver and the
>>>>> 142{4,6} patches and then starting a new round.
>>>>
>>>> I'd agree if 142{4,6} were decided tickets, but they are still ongoing
>>>> and potentially, in the 24-case especially, for a while.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>> Jan
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>>
>>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release, second round
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org>.
Vote aborted. Thanks to everyone who took part.
Five people have claimed ownership of the five remaining tasks:
* Bob Dionne will driving COUCHDB-1424
* Benoît Chesneau will be driving COUCHDB-1426
* Jan Lehnardt will be driving the R15B patch
* Robert Newson will be driving the performance work
* I will be driving round three, obviously
Let's kick some ass!
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Robert Newson <rn...@apache.org> wrote:
> +1. Abort this, get the fixes we have in and start round 3. The
> performance regression issue is elusive, we might, out of necessity,
> have to defer action on that until post 1.2.0.
>
>
> On 2 March 2012 16:02, Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org> wrote:
> > I think we should, at a minimum:
> >
> > * Abort this round
> > * Land the R15B patch
> > * Land COUCHDB-1426 (which seems easy)
> > * Start round three
> >
> > I think we should try to:
> >
> > * Try to land COUCHDB-1424
> > * Get clarification on the performance issues
> >
> > For these last two items, I think we should impose a time limit. Let's
> say
> > a week.
> >
> > I think we should also form some teams, to see if we can do some sprints
> to
> > get these issues fixed.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On Mar 2, 2012, at 16:47 , Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 16:29, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> >> Proposed Action:
> >> >>
> >> >> I'd propose to release 1.2.0 as-is with the following points
> mentioned
> >> >> in the release notes (the exact wording of which is to be done):
> >> >>
> >> >> 1. Note that this release is incompatible with Erlang R15B. A patch
> is
> >> >> available at [LINK to DIFF]; it will appear in Apache CouchDB 1.2.1.
> >> >>
> >> >> 2. Also note that there are some reports of a performance regression
> in
> >> >> view building. While initial and ad-hoc tests showed an improvement
> in
> >> >> most cases, we'd like to ask our users to report any significant
> >> >> differences to the Apache CouchDB 1.1.1 release.
> >> >
> >> > While I am usually cheering on the release process, taken together it
> >> > seems more prudent to abort this round, take the R15B driver and the
> >> > 142{4,6} patches and then starting a new round.
> >>
> >> I'd agree if 142{4,6} were decided tickets, but they are still ongoing
> >> and potentially, in the 24-case especially, for a while.
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >> Jan
> >> --
> >>
> >>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release, second round
Posted by Robert Newson <rn...@apache.org>.
+1. Abort this, get the fixes we have in and start round 3. The
performance regression issue is elusive, we might, out of necessity,
have to defer action on that until post 1.2.0.
On 2 March 2012 16:02, Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org> wrote:
> I think we should, at a minimum:
>
> * Abort this round
> * Land the R15B patch
> * Land COUCHDB-1426 (which seems easy)
> * Start round three
>
> I think we should try to:
>
> * Try to land COUCHDB-1424
> * Get clarification on the performance issues
>
> For these last two items, I think we should impose a time limit. Let's say
> a week.
>
> I think we should also form some teams, to see if we can do some sprints to
> get these issues fixed.
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Mar 2, 2012, at 16:47 , Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
>>
>> > On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 16:29, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >> Proposed Action:
>> >>
>> >> I'd propose to release 1.2.0 as-is with the following points mentioned
>> >> in the release notes (the exact wording of which is to be done):
>> >>
>> >> 1. Note that this release is incompatible with Erlang R15B. A patch is
>> >> available at [LINK to DIFF]; it will appear in Apache CouchDB 1.2.1.
>> >>
>> >> 2. Also note that there are some reports of a performance regression in
>> >> view building. While initial and ad-hoc tests showed an improvement in
>> >> most cases, we'd like to ask our users to report any significant
>> >> differences to the Apache CouchDB 1.1.1 release.
>> >
>> > While I am usually cheering on the release process, taken together it
>> > seems more prudent to abort this round, take the R15B driver and the
>> > 142{4,6} patches and then starting a new round.
>>
>> I'd agree if 142{4,6} were decided tickets, but they are still ongoing
>> and potentially, in the 24-case especially, for a while.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Jan
>> --
>>
>>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release, second round
Posted by Dirkjan Ochtman <di...@ochtman.nl>.
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 17:02, Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org> wrote:
> I think we should, at a minimum:
>
> * Abort this round
> * Land the R15B patch
> * Land COUCHDB-1426 (which seems easy)
> * Start round three
>
> I think we should try to:
>
> * Try to land COUCHDB-1424
> * Get clarification on the performance issues
>
> For these last two items, I think we should impose a time limit. Let's say
> a week.
>
> I think we should also form some teams, to see if we can do some sprints to
> get these issues fixed.
+1 this is closer to what I feel would be the right thing.
Cheers,
Dirkjan
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release, second round
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org>.
I think we should, at a minimum:
* Abort this round
* Land the R15B patch
* Land COUCHDB-1426 (which seems easy)
* Start round three
I think we should try to:
* Try to land COUCHDB-1424
* Get clarification on the performance issues
For these last two items, I think we should impose a time limit. Let's say
a week.
I think we should also form some teams, to see if we can do some sprints to
get these issues fixed.
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On Mar 2, 2012, at 16:47 , Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 16:29, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> Proposed Action:
> >>
> >> I'd propose to release 1.2.0 as-is with the following points mentioned
> >> in the release notes (the exact wording of which is to be done):
> >>
> >> 1. Note that this release is incompatible with Erlang R15B. A patch is
> >> available at [LINK to DIFF]; it will appear in Apache CouchDB 1.2.1.
> >>
> >> 2. Also note that there are some reports of a performance regression in
> >> view building. While initial and ad-hoc tests showed an improvement in
> >> most cases, we'd like to ask our users to report any significant
> >> differences to the Apache CouchDB 1.1.1 release.
> >
> > While I am usually cheering on the release process, taken together it
> > seems more prudent to abort this round, take the R15B driver and the
> > 142{4,6} patches and then starting a new round.
>
> I'd agree if 142{4,6} were decided tickets, but they are still ongoing
> and potentially, in the 24-case especially, for a while.
>
> Cheers
> Jan
> --
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release, second round
Posted by Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org>.
On Mar 2, 2012, at 16:47 , Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 16:29, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Proposed Action:
>>
>> I'd propose to release 1.2.0 as-is with the following points mentioned
>> in the release notes (the exact wording of which is to be done):
>>
>> 1. Note that this release is incompatible with Erlang R15B. A patch is
>> available at [LINK to DIFF]; it will appear in Apache CouchDB 1.2.1.
>>
>> 2. Also note that there are some reports of a performance regression in
>> view building. While initial and ad-hoc tests showed an improvement in
>> most cases, we'd like to ask our users to report any significant
>> differences to the Apache CouchDB 1.1.1 release.
>
> While I am usually cheering on the release process, taken together it
> seems more prudent to abort this round, take the R15B driver and the
> 142{4,6} patches and then starting a new round.
I'd agree if 142{4,6} were decided tickets, but they are still ongoing
and potentially, in the 24-case especially, for a while.
Cheers
Jan
--
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release, second round
Posted by Dirkjan Ochtman <di...@ochtman.nl>.
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 16:29, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> Proposed Action:
>
> I'd propose to release 1.2.0 as-is with the following points mentioned
> in the release notes (the exact wording of which is to be done):
>
> 1. Note that this release is incompatible with Erlang R15B. A patch is
> available at [LINK to DIFF]; it will appear in Apache CouchDB 1.2.1.
>
> 2. Also note that there are some reports of a performance regression in
> view building. While initial and ad-hoc tests showed an improvement in
> most cases, we'd like to ask our users to report any significant
> differences to the Apache CouchDB 1.1.1 release.
While I am usually cheering on the release process, taken together it
seems more prudent to abort this round, take the R15B driver and the
142{4,6} patches and then starting a new round.
Cheers,
Dirkjan
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release, second round
Posted by Robert Newson <rn...@apache.org>.
+1
On 2 March 2012 15:29, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> Thanks Benoit!
>
> * * *
>
> As an update to the ongoing 1.2.0 release these issues were raised:
>
> - Performance regression (A thread on dev@)
> - Multiple Spidermonkey version detection (COUCHDB-1426)
> - R15B icu_driver compatibility (git branch R15B0-driver)
> - R15B make check hang on Mac OS X Lion (COUCHDB-1424)
>
> I'd like to give a quick update on each of them and I'll propose a plan
> of action. If you disagree with any of my updates or the conclusion,
> please speak up :)
>
> * Performance Regression
>
> We started collecting a bunch of numbers for a few select scenarios,
> some of which show a regression, most of which show an improvement
> though. We haven't yet identified the variables that cause all this
> (different Spidermonkey releases made a huge difference in one case). So
> far the test cases don't cover much ground. E.g. we haven't had a chance
> to reproduce one of the reports that we don't have direct access too.
>
> I believe getting a better understanding of what is going on here will
> take some more time. Time that we should absolutely spend, so we are
> able to show some baseline performance numbers going forward to compare
> improvements and future releases against.
>
> * COUCHDB-1426
>
> We are still discussing the intention and merits of the patch and I
> believe there's definitely something to fix eventually, but I don't
> think this should hold 1.2.0. Benoit, who reported it initially and made
> it blocking, agrees under the condition that we ship 1.2.1 soonish that
> includes a resolution for this ticket.
>
> * R15B0-driver
>
> This renders 1.2.0 as is incompatible with the latest Erlang R15B
> release. The fix is trivial, but it didn't make the release artefact.
>
> * COUCHDB-1424
>
> I so far could show that this only happens on Mac OS X Lion and R15B but
> nowhere else. I'm happy to conclude that this isn't a release blocking
> issue. However, we should resolve it for the 1.2.1 release like
> COUCHDB-1426.
>
> * * *
>
> Proposed Action:
>
> I'd propose to release 1.2.0 as-is with the following points mentioned
> in the release notes (the exact wording of which is to be done):
>
> 1. Note that this release is incompatible with Erlang R15B. A patch is
> available at [LINK to DIFF]; it will appear in Apache CouchDB 1.2.1.
>
> 2. Also note that there are some reports of a performance regression in
> view building. While initial and ad-hoc tests showed an improvement in
> most cases, we'd like to ask our users to report any significant
> differences to the Apache CouchDB 1.1.1 release.
>
> * * *
>
> I'm happy to alter the plan of action based on your feedback, I just
> want to make sure we know which issues we are discussing and what their
> respective states are to move this forward.
>
> * * *
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-1424
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-1426
> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=couchdb.git;a=commit;h=b1af764b
>
> Cheers
> Jan
> --
>
>
> On Mar 2, 2012, at 13:48 , Benoit Chesneau wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 12:21 AM, Benoit Chesneau <bc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Posted a patch fixing COUCHDB-1426.
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-1426
>>
>> After some discussions, I made the issue none blocking but critical.
>> I'm now +0 I guess.
>>
>> - benoît
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release, second round
Posted by Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org>.
Thanks Benoit!
* * *
As an update to the ongoing 1.2.0 release these issues were raised:
- Performance regression (A thread on dev@)
- Multiple Spidermonkey version detection (COUCHDB-1426)
- R15B icu_driver compatibility (git branch R15B0-driver)
- R15B make check hang on Mac OS X Lion (COUCHDB-1424)
I'd like to give a quick update on each of them and I'll propose a plan
of action. If you disagree with any of my updates or the conclusion,
please speak up :)
* Performance Regression
We started collecting a bunch of numbers for a few select scenarios,
some of which show a regression, most of which show an improvement
though. We haven't yet identified the variables that cause all this
(different Spidermonkey releases made a huge difference in one case). So
far the test cases don't cover much ground. E.g. we haven't had a chance
to reproduce one of the reports that we don't have direct access too.
I believe getting a better understanding of what is going on here will
take some more time. Time that we should absolutely spend, so we are
able to show some baseline performance numbers going forward to compare
improvements and future releases against.
* COUCHDB-1426
We are still discussing the intention and merits of the patch and I
believe there's definitely something to fix eventually, but I don't
think this should hold 1.2.0. Benoit, who reported it initially and made
it blocking, agrees under the condition that we ship 1.2.1 soonish that
includes a resolution for this ticket.
* R15B0-driver
This renders 1.2.0 as is incompatible with the latest Erlang R15B
release. The fix is trivial, but it didn't make the release artefact.
* COUCHDB-1424
I so far could show that this only happens on Mac OS X Lion and R15B but
nowhere else. I'm happy to conclude that this isn't a release blocking
issue. However, we should resolve it for the 1.2.1 release like
COUCHDB-1426.
* * *
Proposed Action:
I'd propose to release 1.2.0 as-is with the following points mentioned
in the release notes (the exact wording of which is to be done):
1. Note that this release is incompatible with Erlang R15B. A patch is
available at [LINK to DIFF]; it will appear in Apache CouchDB 1.2.1.
2. Also note that there are some reports of a performance regression in
view building. While initial and ad-hoc tests showed an improvement in
most cases, we'd like to ask our users to report any significant
differences to the Apache CouchDB 1.1.1 release.
* * *
I'm happy to alter the plan of action based on your feedback, I just
want to make sure we know which issues we are discussing and what their
respective states are to move this forward.
* * *
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-1424
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-1426
http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=couchdb.git;a=commit;h=b1af764b
Cheers
Jan
--
On Mar 2, 2012, at 13:48 , Benoit Chesneau wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 12:21 AM, Benoit Chesneau <bc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Posted a patch fixing COUCHDB-1426.
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-1426
>
> After some discussions, I made the issue none blocking but critical.
> I'm now +0 I guess.
>
> - benoît
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release, second round
Posted by Benoit Chesneau <bc...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 12:21 AM, Benoit Chesneau <bc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Posted a patch fixing COUCHDB-1426.
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-1426
After some discussions, I made the issue none blocking but critical.
I'm now +0 I guess.
- benoît