You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@couchdb.apache.org by Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> on 2012/03/25 19:49:19 UTC
[VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries, round 3
Hello,
I would like to call a vote on the following Windows binaries based on
the concurrent Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release artefact from git:
654768d32bae3639756c18b200582093aa51f349
https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/
These have been built using Microsoft SDK 7.1, and includes the
following 3rd party code:
Erlang R14B04 or R15B
OpenSSL 0.9.8r
wxWidgets 2.8.12
Mozilla JavaScript 1.8.5
cURL 7.23.1
ICU 4.6.1
Inno setup 5.4.3
Please follow the test procedure before voting:
https://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
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!
A+
Dave
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries, round 3
Posted by Ryan Ramage <ry...@gmail.com>.
+1
Windows 7 Home Premium 32 Bit
MD5 and sha ok
signature ok
No Malware, viruses or other baddies.
Firefox 9.0.1
Install verification ok
Test suite complete success.
A+ couch team, and Dave for the windows binaries.
On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to call a vote on the following Windows binaries based on
> the concurrent Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release artefact from git:
>
> 654768d32bae3639756c18b200582093aa51f349
>
> https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/
>
> These have been built using Microsoft SDK 7.1, and includes the
> following 3rd party code:
>
> Erlang R14B04 or R15B
> OpenSSL 0.9.8r
> wxWidgets 2.8.12
> Mozilla JavaScript 1.8.5
> cURL 7.23.1
> ICU 4.6.1
> Inno setup 5.4.3
>
> Please follow the test procedure before voting:
>
> https://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
>
> 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!
>
> A+
> Dave
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries, round 3
Posted by Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz>.
On 25 March 2012 19:49, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to call a vote on the following Windows binaries based on
> the concurrent Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release artefact from git:
>
> 654768d32bae3639756c18b200582093aa51f349
>
> https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/
>
> These have been built using Microsoft SDK 7.1, and includes the
> following 3rd party code:
>
> Erlang R14B04 or R15B
> OpenSSL 0.9.8r
> wxWidgets 2.8.12
> Mozilla JavaScript 1.8.5
> cURL 7.23.1
> ICU 4.6.1
> Inno setup 5.4.3
>
> Please follow the test procedure before voting:
>
> https://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
>
> 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!
>
> A+
> Dave
Not above talking to myself...
+1 #workshere
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries, round 3
Posted by Manuel Dahmen <ma...@gmail.com>.
i would like to test it under windows vista. i cant download anything
today. i ll come back tomorrow.
Manuel DAHMEN
Rue Fosse-aux-raines 30
4020 LIEGE
0470/22.91.05
Le 25 mars 2012 18:49, "Dave Cottlehuber" <da...@muse.net.nz> a écrit :
> Hello,
>
> I would like to call a vote on the following Windows binaries based on
> the concurrent Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release artefact from git:
>
> 654768d32bae3639756c18b200582093aa51f349
>
> https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/
>
> These have been built using Microsoft SDK 7.1, and includes the
> following 3rd party code:
>
> Erlang R14B04 or R15B
> OpenSSL 0.9.8r
> wxWidgets 2.8.12
> Mozilla JavaScript 1.8.5
> cURL 7.23.1
> ICU 4.6.1
> Inno setup 5.4.3
>
> Please follow the test procedure before voting:
>
> https://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
>
> 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!
>
> A+
> Dave
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries, round 3
Posted by Nick North <no...@gmail.com>.
I'll try the debugger on that Win7 replicator_db test this evening and see
what it reveals. I'll also try the Win8 failure again: it gave that error a
couple of times each running locally and from the the VMWare host, which is
as close as I can get to a network test on my home setup.
On 25 March 2012 22:35, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
> On 25 March 2012 21:28, Nick North <no...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > +1
> > Windows 7 Ultimate x64 SP1
> > Windows 8 Consumer Preview x64 ( on VMWare Player)
> > Firefox 11.0
> > Signature: is there a missing .asc file? I didn't see the signature file,
> > but am probably missing something obvious.
>
> I noticed that I didn't upload them at same time as the shas etc,
> they're there now. Sorry!
>
> 1.2.0_otp_R15B.exe.asc although they were missing up until
> > Md5 & sha OK.
> > No malware detected.
> > End-user verification OK.
> > Futon tests passed on Win7 with the usual exception of our friend
> > replicator_db, with the usual error:
> > Assertion failed: expected 'null', got
> >
> '{"_id":"foo666","_rev":"1-8f008c4354eb07d5fbfc399a84bc88a1","value":666}'
>
> We shouldn't be seeing that anymore. Do you feel like running this in a
> debugger
> and seeing what breaks?
>
> > Futon tests passed on Win8 with the exception of view_compaction, which
> > says:
> > Assertion failed: resp.view_index.disk_size < disk_size_before_compact
>
> If you gently re-run that a few times does it come right? I had varying
> results,
> still digging on what the issue is in this one.
>
> > I vote +1 on the rounds that the replicator_db error seems well-known and
> > not a genuine problem, and issues with Win8 can't really be addressed
> until
> > the final release of the OS. I was not prompted for a restart after
> > installation, by the way.
> > On 25 March 2012 18:49, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
> >
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> I would like to call a vote on the following Windows binaries based on
> >> the concurrent Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release artefact from git:
> >>
> >> 654768d32bae3639756c18b200582093aa51f349
> >>
> >> https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/
> >>
> >> These have been built using Microsoft SDK 7.1, and includes the
> >> following 3rd party code:
> >>
> >> Erlang R14B04 or R15B
> >> OpenSSL 0.9.8r
> >> wxWidgets 2.8.12
> >> Mozilla JavaScript 1.8.5
> >> cURL 7.23.1
> >> ICU 4.6.1
> >> Inno setup 5.4.3
> >>
> >> Please follow the test procedure before voting:
> >>
> >> https://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
> >>
> >> 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!
> >>
> >> A+
> >> Dave
> >>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries, round 3
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org>.
Dave, when you wrap up this thread, please do not refer to it as a vote, or
change the subject to "vote results."
Thanks!
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This is an important note from the PMC.
>
> We were in error to call this thread a vote, and this is my fault.
>
> To get things clear:
>
> - The PMC does not vote on binary packages. The PMC only votes on
> release artefacts, which are always source packages.
> - The Windows binaries are being provided by Dave Cottlehuber for
> convenience only, and do not constitute a release by the PMC.
> - We will host the Windows binaries in our project distribution
> directory, but we will add a note to inform users that any binary packages
> are not official releases and are provided for convenience only.
> - Binary packages which are referenced by the project (from the
> website, for instance) will always be built from a corresponding source
> release.
> - Dave Cottlehuber has done astounding work getting us to this point,
> and I am very pleased that so many people have provided feedback. In
> future, Dave will be asking for testers, but we will not be referring to
> this as a vote.
> - With my PMC hat on, and my Release Team hat on, I can tell you that
> we will try to run the release in parallel with any binary package testing.
> If there are significant problems in either, we will abort both. We will
> also try to announce the availability of binary packages along with the
> source release announcement.
>
> Apologies that this has come so late in the thread. Be assured that it
> does not change anything, and we are still moving forward as planned. But
> it is important, as a PMC, that we get our terminology right, and set
> expectations appropriately.
>
> Thank you,
>
> N
>
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 11:16 PM, Randall Leeds <ra...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 12:29, Nick North <no...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Not sure whether to be annoyed or not: when I run the replicator_db test
>> > with Firebug installed it passes every time. I'm guessing that it is
>> some
>> > timing issue and the debugger slows things down enough to prevent it
>> > happening.
>> >
>> > Similarly the Win8 view_compaction test works in my Firebugged Firefox.
>> So
>> > now I'm a more positive +1, though just a little peeved that it's not
>> > possible to track down the problems.
>>
>> Well that is helpful, thanks. I'm compiling a private bullet list of
>> test-related issues to bring to the group for attacking after 1.2.
>> I'll take a look at this with an eye towards timing sensitive
>> behaviour.
>>
>> -Randall
>>
>> >
>> > Nick
>> > On 25 March 2012 22:35, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 25 March 2012 21:28, Nick North <no...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > +1
>> >> > Windows 7 Ultimate x64 SP1
>> >> > Windows 8 Consumer Preview x64 ( on VMWare Player)
>> >> > Firefox 11.0
>> >> > Signature: is there a missing .asc file? I didn't see the signature
>> file,
>> >> > but am probably missing something obvious.
>> >>
>> >> I noticed that I didn't upload them at same time as the shas etc,
>> >> they're there now. Sorry!
>> >>
>> >> 1.2.0_otp_R15B.exe.asc although they were missing up until
>> >> > Md5 & sha OK.
>> >> > No malware detected.
>> >> > End-user verification OK.
>> >> > Futon tests passed on Win7 with the usual exception of our friend
>> >> > replicator_db, with the usual error:
>> >> > Assertion failed: expected 'null', got
>> >> >
>> >>
>> '{"_id":"foo666","_rev":"1-8f008c4354eb07d5fbfc399a84bc88a1","value":666}'
>> >>
>> >> We shouldn't be seeing that anymore. Do you feel like running this in a
>> >> debugger
>> >> and seeing what breaks?
>> >>
>> >> > Futon tests passed on Win8 with the exception of view_compaction,
>> which
>> >> > says:
>> >> > Assertion failed: resp.view_index.disk_size <
>> disk_size_before_compact
>> >>
>> >> If you gently re-run that a few times does it come right? I had varying
>> >> results,
>> >> still digging on what the issue is in this one.
>> >>
>> >> > I vote +1 on the rounds that the replicator_db error seems
>> well-known and
>> >> > not a genuine problem, and issues with Win8 can't really be addressed
>> >> until
>> >> > the final release of the OS. I was not prompted for a restart after
>> >> > installation, by the way.
>> >> > On 25 March 2012 18:49, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Hello,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I would like to call a vote on the following Windows binaries based
>> on
>> >> >> the concurrent Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release artefact from git:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 654768d32bae3639756c18b200582093aa51f349
>> >> >>
>> >> >> https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/
>> >> >>
>> >> >> These have been built using Microsoft SDK 7.1, and includes the
>> >> >> following 3rd party code:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Erlang R14B04 or R15B
>> >> >> OpenSSL 0.9.8r
>> >> >> wxWidgets 2.8.12
>> >> >> Mozilla JavaScript 1.8.5
>> >> >> cURL 7.23.1
>> >> >> ICU 4.6.1
>> >> >> Inno setup 5.4.3
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Please follow the test procedure before voting:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> https://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 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!
>> >> >>
>> >> >> A+
>> >> >> Dave
>> >> >>
>> >>
>>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries, round 3
Posted by Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz>.
On 28 March 2012 19:27, Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This is an important note from the PMC.
>
> We were in error to call this thread a vote, and this is my fault.
>
> To get things clear:
>
> - The PMC does not vote on binary packages. The PMC only votes on
> release artefacts, which are always source packages.
> - The Windows binaries are being provided by Dave Cottlehuber for
> convenience only, and do not constitute a release by the PMC.
> - We will host the Windows binaries in our project distribution
> directory, but we will add a note to inform users that any binary packages
> are not official releases and are provided for convenience only.
> - Binary packages which are referenced by the project (from the website,
> for instance) will always be built from a corresponding source release.
> - Dave Cottlehuber has done astounding work getting us to this point,
> and I am very pleased that so many people have provided feedback. In
> future, Dave will be asking for testers, but we will not be referring to
> this as a vote.
> - With my PMC hat on, and my Release Team hat on, I can tell you that we
> will try to run the release in parallel with any binary package testing. If
> there are significant problems in either, we will abort both. We will also
> try to announce the availability of binary packages along with the source
> release announcement.
>
> Apologies that this has come so late in the thread. Be assured that it does
> not change anything, and we are still moving forward as planned. But it is
> important, as a PMC, that we get our terminology right, and set
> expectations appropriately.
>
> Thank you,
>
> N
Firstly thanks everybody for the efforts in testing this - it gives me a much
greater level of comfort than a year or so ago when I had the first few test
runs. Windows CouchDB gets over 1000 downloads a month so it's great
to have a few more eyes onboard!
Noah no worries about the paperwork, we need to keep things clean & tidy.
Given that the 1.2.0 source release has been aborted, let's wrap this
(don't mention the V-word or the R-word) & have another run at testing
binaries for the next source round. I'm looking forwards to seeing 1.2.0
roll in the very near future.
Thanks again!
A+
Dave
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries, round 3
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org>.
Hello,
This is an important note from the PMC.
We were in error to call this thread a vote, and this is my fault.
To get things clear:
- The PMC does not vote on binary packages. The PMC only votes on
release artefacts, which are always source packages.
- The Windows binaries are being provided by Dave Cottlehuber for
convenience only, and do not constitute a release by the PMC.
- We will host the Windows binaries in our project distribution
directory, but we will add a note to inform users that any binary packages
are not official releases and are provided for convenience only.
- Binary packages which are referenced by the project (from the website,
for instance) will always be built from a corresponding source release.
- Dave Cottlehuber has done astounding work getting us to this point,
and I am very pleased that so many people have provided feedback. In
future, Dave will be asking for testers, but we will not be referring to
this as a vote.
- With my PMC hat on, and my Release Team hat on, I can tell you that we
will try to run the release in parallel with any binary package testing. If
there are significant problems in either, we will abort both. We will also
try to announce the availability of binary packages along with the source
release announcement.
Apologies that this has come so late in the thread. Be assured that it does
not change anything, and we are still moving forward as planned. But it is
important, as a PMC, that we get our terminology right, and set
expectations appropriately.
Thank you,
N
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 11:16 PM, Randall Leeds <ra...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 12:29, Nick North <no...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Not sure whether to be annoyed or not: when I run the replicator_db test
> > with Firebug installed it passes every time. I'm guessing that it is some
> > timing issue and the debugger slows things down enough to prevent it
> > happening.
> >
> > Similarly the Win8 view_compaction test works in my Firebugged Firefox.
> So
> > now I'm a more positive +1, though just a little peeved that it's not
> > possible to track down the problems.
>
> Well that is helpful, thanks. I'm compiling a private bullet list of
> test-related issues to bring to the group for attacking after 1.2.
> I'll take a look at this with an eye towards timing sensitive
> behaviour.
>
> -Randall
>
> >
> > Nick
> > On 25 March 2012 22:35, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
> >
> >> On 25 March 2012 21:28, Nick North <no...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > +1
> >> > Windows 7 Ultimate x64 SP1
> >> > Windows 8 Consumer Preview x64 ( on VMWare Player)
> >> > Firefox 11.0
> >> > Signature: is there a missing .asc file? I didn't see the signature
> file,
> >> > but am probably missing something obvious.
> >>
> >> I noticed that I didn't upload them at same time as the shas etc,
> >> they're there now. Sorry!
> >>
> >> 1.2.0_otp_R15B.exe.asc although they were missing up until
> >> > Md5 & sha OK.
> >> > No malware detected.
> >> > End-user verification OK.
> >> > Futon tests passed on Win7 with the usual exception of our friend
> >> > replicator_db, with the usual error:
> >> > Assertion failed: expected 'null', got
> >> >
> >>
> '{"_id":"foo666","_rev":"1-8f008c4354eb07d5fbfc399a84bc88a1","value":666}'
> >>
> >> We shouldn't be seeing that anymore. Do you feel like running this in a
> >> debugger
> >> and seeing what breaks?
> >>
> >> > Futon tests passed on Win8 with the exception of view_compaction,
> which
> >> > says:
> >> > Assertion failed: resp.view_index.disk_size < disk_size_before_compact
> >>
> >> If you gently re-run that a few times does it come right? I had varying
> >> results,
> >> still digging on what the issue is in this one.
> >>
> >> > I vote +1 on the rounds that the replicator_db error seems well-known
> and
> >> > not a genuine problem, and issues with Win8 can't really be addressed
> >> until
> >> > the final release of the OS. I was not prompted for a restart after
> >> > installation, by the way.
> >> > On 25 March 2012 18:49, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hello,
> >> >>
> >> >> I would like to call a vote on the following Windows binaries based
> on
> >> >> the concurrent Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release artefact from git:
> >> >>
> >> >> 654768d32bae3639756c18b200582093aa51f349
> >> >>
> >> >> https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/
> >> >>
> >> >> These have been built using Microsoft SDK 7.1, and includes the
> >> >> following 3rd party code:
> >> >>
> >> >> Erlang R14B04 or R15B
> >> >> OpenSSL 0.9.8r
> >> >> wxWidgets 2.8.12
> >> >> Mozilla JavaScript 1.8.5
> >> >> cURL 7.23.1
> >> >> ICU 4.6.1
> >> >> Inno setup 5.4.3
> >> >>
> >> >> Please follow the test procedure before voting:
> >> >>
> >> >> https://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
> >> >>
> >> >> 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!
> >> >>
> >> >> A+
> >> >> Dave
> >> >>
> >>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries, round 3
Posted by Randall Leeds <ra...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 12:29, Nick North <no...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Not sure whether to be annoyed or not: when I run the replicator_db test
> with Firebug installed it passes every time. I'm guessing that it is some
> timing issue and the debugger slows things down enough to prevent it
> happening.
>
> Similarly the Win8 view_compaction test works in my Firebugged Firefox. So
> now I'm a more positive +1, though just a little peeved that it's not
> possible to track down the problems.
Well that is helpful, thanks. I'm compiling a private bullet list of
test-related issues to bring to the group for attacking after 1.2.
I'll take a look at this with an eye towards timing sensitive
behaviour.
-Randall
>
> Nick
> On 25 March 2012 22:35, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
>
>> On 25 March 2012 21:28, Nick North <no...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > +1
>> > Windows 7 Ultimate x64 SP1
>> > Windows 8 Consumer Preview x64 ( on VMWare Player)
>> > Firefox 11.0
>> > Signature: is there a missing .asc file? I didn't see the signature file,
>> > but am probably missing something obvious.
>>
>> I noticed that I didn't upload them at same time as the shas etc,
>> they're there now. Sorry!
>>
>> 1.2.0_otp_R15B.exe.asc although they were missing up until
>> > Md5 & sha OK.
>> > No malware detected.
>> > End-user verification OK.
>> > Futon tests passed on Win7 with the usual exception of our friend
>> > replicator_db, with the usual error:
>> > Assertion failed: expected 'null', got
>> >
>> '{"_id":"foo666","_rev":"1-8f008c4354eb07d5fbfc399a84bc88a1","value":666}'
>>
>> We shouldn't be seeing that anymore. Do you feel like running this in a
>> debugger
>> and seeing what breaks?
>>
>> > Futon tests passed on Win8 with the exception of view_compaction, which
>> > says:
>> > Assertion failed: resp.view_index.disk_size < disk_size_before_compact
>>
>> If you gently re-run that a few times does it come right? I had varying
>> results,
>> still digging on what the issue is in this one.
>>
>> > I vote +1 on the rounds that the replicator_db error seems well-known and
>> > not a genuine problem, and issues with Win8 can't really be addressed
>> until
>> > the final release of the OS. I was not prompted for a restart after
>> > installation, by the way.
>> > On 25 March 2012 18:49, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hello,
>> >>
>> >> I would like to call a vote on the following Windows binaries based on
>> >> the concurrent Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release artefact from git:
>> >>
>> >> 654768d32bae3639756c18b200582093aa51f349
>> >>
>> >> https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/
>> >>
>> >> These have been built using Microsoft SDK 7.1, and includes the
>> >> following 3rd party code:
>> >>
>> >> Erlang R14B04 or R15B
>> >> OpenSSL 0.9.8r
>> >> wxWidgets 2.8.12
>> >> Mozilla JavaScript 1.8.5
>> >> cURL 7.23.1
>> >> ICU 4.6.1
>> >> Inno setup 5.4.3
>> >>
>> >> Please follow the test procedure before voting:
>> >>
>> >> https://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
>> >>
>> >> 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!
>> >>
>> >> A+
>> >> Dave
>> >>
>>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries, round 3
Posted by Nick North <no...@gmail.com>.
Not sure whether to be annoyed or not: when I run the replicator_db test
with Firebug installed it passes every time. I'm guessing that it is some
timing issue and the debugger slows things down enough to prevent it
happening.
Similarly the Win8 view_compaction test works in my Firebugged Firefox. So
now I'm a more positive +1, though just a little peeved that it's not
possible to track down the problems.
Nick
On 25 March 2012 22:35, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
> On 25 March 2012 21:28, Nick North <no...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > +1
> > Windows 7 Ultimate x64 SP1
> > Windows 8 Consumer Preview x64 ( on VMWare Player)
> > Firefox 11.0
> > Signature: is there a missing .asc file? I didn't see the signature file,
> > but am probably missing something obvious.
>
> I noticed that I didn't upload them at same time as the shas etc,
> they're there now. Sorry!
>
> 1.2.0_otp_R15B.exe.asc although they were missing up until
> > Md5 & sha OK.
> > No malware detected.
> > End-user verification OK.
> > Futon tests passed on Win7 with the usual exception of our friend
> > replicator_db, with the usual error:
> > Assertion failed: expected 'null', got
> >
> '{"_id":"foo666","_rev":"1-8f008c4354eb07d5fbfc399a84bc88a1","value":666}'
>
> We shouldn't be seeing that anymore. Do you feel like running this in a
> debugger
> and seeing what breaks?
>
> > Futon tests passed on Win8 with the exception of view_compaction, which
> > says:
> > Assertion failed: resp.view_index.disk_size < disk_size_before_compact
>
> If you gently re-run that a few times does it come right? I had varying
> results,
> still digging on what the issue is in this one.
>
> > I vote +1 on the rounds that the replicator_db error seems well-known and
> > not a genuine problem, and issues with Win8 can't really be addressed
> until
> > the final release of the OS. I was not prompted for a restart after
> > installation, by the way.
> > On 25 March 2012 18:49, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
> >
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> I would like to call a vote on the following Windows binaries based on
> >> the concurrent Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release artefact from git:
> >>
> >> 654768d32bae3639756c18b200582093aa51f349
> >>
> >> https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/
> >>
> >> These have been built using Microsoft SDK 7.1, and includes the
> >> following 3rd party code:
> >>
> >> Erlang R14B04 or R15B
> >> OpenSSL 0.9.8r
> >> wxWidgets 2.8.12
> >> Mozilla JavaScript 1.8.5
> >> cURL 7.23.1
> >> ICU 4.6.1
> >> Inno setup 5.4.3
> >>
> >> Please follow the test procedure before voting:
> >>
> >> https://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
> >>
> >> 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!
> >>
> >> A+
> >> Dave
> >>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries, round 3
Posted by Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz>.
On 25 March 2012 21:28, Nick North <no...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1
> Windows 7 Ultimate x64 SP1
> Windows 8 Consumer Preview x64 ( on VMWare Player)
> Firefox 11.0
> Signature: is there a missing .asc file? I didn't see the signature file,
> but am probably missing something obvious.
I noticed that I didn't upload them at same time as the shas etc,
they're there now. Sorry!
1.2.0_otp_R15B.exe.asc although they were missing up until
> Md5 & sha OK.
> No malware detected.
> End-user verification OK.
> Futon tests passed on Win7 with the usual exception of our friend
> replicator_db, with the usual error:
> Assertion failed: expected 'null', got
> '{"_id":"foo666","_rev":"1-8f008c4354eb07d5fbfc399a84bc88a1","value":666}'
We shouldn't be seeing that anymore. Do you feel like running this in a debugger
and seeing what breaks?
> Futon tests passed on Win8 with the exception of view_compaction, which
> says:
> Assertion failed: resp.view_index.disk_size < disk_size_before_compact
If you gently re-run that a few times does it come right? I had varying results,
still digging on what the issue is in this one.
> I vote +1 on the rounds that the replicator_db error seems well-known and
> not a genuine problem, and issues with Win8 can't really be addressed until
> the final release of the OS. I was not prompted for a restart after
> installation, by the way.
> On 25 March 2012 18:49, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I would like to call a vote on the following Windows binaries based on
>> the concurrent Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release artefact from git:
>>
>> 654768d32bae3639756c18b200582093aa51f349
>>
>> https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/
>>
>> These have been built using Microsoft SDK 7.1, and includes the
>> following 3rd party code:
>>
>> Erlang R14B04 or R15B
>> OpenSSL 0.9.8r
>> wxWidgets 2.8.12
>> Mozilla JavaScript 1.8.5
>> cURL 7.23.1
>> ICU 4.6.1
>> Inno setup 5.4.3
>>
>> Please follow the test procedure before voting:
>>
>> https://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
>>
>> 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!
>>
>> A+
>> Dave
>>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries, round 3
Posted by Nick North <no...@gmail.com>.
+1
Windows 7 Ultimate x64 SP1
Windows 8 Consumer Preview x64 ( on VMWare Player)
Firefox 11.0
Signature: is there a missing .asc file? I didn't see the signature file,
but am probably missing something obvious.
Md5 & sha OK.
No malware detected.
End-user verification OK.
Futon tests passed on Win7 with the usual exception of our friend
replicator_db, with the usual error:
Assertion failed: expected 'null', got
'{"_id":"foo666","_rev":"1-8f008c4354eb07d5fbfc399a84bc88a1","value":666}'
Futon tests passed on Win8 with the exception of view_compaction, which
says:
Assertion failed: resp.view_index.disk_size < disk_size_before_compact
I vote +1 on the rounds that the replicator_db error seems well-known and
not a genuine problem, and issues with Win8 can't really be addressed until
the final release of the OS. I was not prompted for a restart after
installation, by the way.
On 25 March 2012 18:49, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to call a vote on the following Windows binaries based on
> the concurrent Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release artefact from git:
>
> 654768d32bae3639756c18b200582093aa51f349
>
> https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/
>
> These have been built using Microsoft SDK 7.1, and includes the
> following 3rd party code:
>
> Erlang R14B04 or R15B
> OpenSSL 0.9.8r
> wxWidgets 2.8.12
> Mozilla JavaScript 1.8.5
> cURL 7.23.1
> ICU 4.6.1
> Inno setup 5.4.3
>
> Please follow the test procedure before voting:
>
> https://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
>
> 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!
>
> A+
> Dave
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries, round 3
Posted by Nick North <no...@gmail.com>.
+1
Windows Vista Business SP2 x64
MD5 and sha ok
signature ok
No Malware, viruses or other baddies.
Firefox 11
Install verification ok
Test suite complete success.
On 25 March 2012 18:49, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to call a vote on the following Windows binaries based on
> the concurrent Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release artefact from git:
>
> 654768d32bae3639756c18b200582093aa51f349
>
> https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/
>
> These have been built using Microsoft SDK 7.1, and includes the
> following 3rd party code:
>
> Erlang R14B04 or R15B
> OpenSSL 0.9.8r
> wxWidgets 2.8.12
> Mozilla JavaScript 1.8.5
> cURL 7.23.1
> ICU 4.6.1
> Inno setup 5.4.3
>
> Please follow the test procedure before voting:
>
> https://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
>
> 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!
>
> A+
> Dave
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries, round 3
Posted by Nick North <no...@gmail.com>.
+1
Windows 2008 R2 Standard (on VMWare)
Firefox 11
signature OK
md5 & sha OK
No malware detected
End-user verification OK
Futon tests all passed
Windows 2008 succeeded on all tests first time - that's the first Windows
OS I've seen pass on everything. I also found the .asc file this time, and
the signature is good.
I'll try to give Vista a go as well tomorrow.
On 25 March 2012 18:49, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to call a vote on the following Windows binaries based on
> the concurrent Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release artefact from git:
>
> 654768d32bae3639756c18b200582093aa51f349
>
> https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/
>
> These have been built using Microsoft SDK 7.1, and includes the
> following 3rd party code:
>
> Erlang R14B04 or R15B
> OpenSSL 0.9.8r
> wxWidgets 2.8.12
> Mozilla JavaScript 1.8.5
> cURL 7.23.1
> ICU 4.6.1
> Inno setup 5.4.3
>
> Please follow the test procedure before voting:
>
> https://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
>
> 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!
>
> A+
> Dave
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries, round 3
Posted by Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz>.
On 25 March 2012 21:35, Alexander Shorin <kx...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Dave,
>
>> What do you mean by rolling update, and where do you see this?
>
> By "rolling update" I mean install new CouchDB version without
> uninstalling old one. It's quite intuitive to expect that installer
> would replace old version by new one(:
This will be possible with an MSI-based version.
>> It shouldn't require a restart if you uninstall prior. How were
>> you doing this? And what's your idea for improving it?
>
> For my case it have ask me for restart 3 times: on first install, on
> uninstall when I have noted that something went wrong and on second
> clean install. Actually I have no ideas how this could be fixed: need
> to notice was system libraries are installed or affected on. May be it
> because R15B, because all previous versions was for R14, may be
> because I already have erlang installed and it causes some conflicts.
> Need to inspect situation more detailed, sorry for my unstructured
> critics(:
No problem, I'll make sure the upgrade path is clearly stated to avoid this.
Mixing erts releases was never going to work anyway.
>> BTW do you have any results on testing especially the pgp key was
>> valid, and if any malware was present?
>>
>> http://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
>
> TrendMicro OfficeScan 10 tells me that every thing is clear, nothing
> malicious or strange noticed with procmon tool.
> PGP key are valid as md5/sha hashes.
>
> --
> ,,,^..^,,,
Looks like we are good to go then.
A+
Dave
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries, round 3
Posted by Alexander Shorin <kx...@gmail.com>.
Hi Dave,
> What do you mean by rolling update, and where do you see this?
By "rolling update" I mean install new CouchDB version without
uninstalling old one. It's quite intuitive to expect that installer
would replace old version by new one(:
> It shouldn't require a restart if you uninstall prior. How were
> you doing this? And what's your idea for improving it?
For my case it have ask me for restart 3 times: on first install, on
uninstall when I have noted that something went wrong and on second
clean install. Actually I have no ideas how this could be fixed: need
to notice was system libraries are installed or affected on. May be it
because R15B, because all previous versions was for R14, may be
because I already have erlang installed and it causes some conflicts.
Need to inspect situation more detailed, sorry for my unstructured
critics(:
> BTW do you have any results on testing especially the pgp key was
> valid, and if any malware was present?
>
> http://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
TrendMicro OfficeScan 10 tells me that every thing is clear, nothing
malicious or strange noticed with procmon tool.
PGP key are valid as md5/sha hashes.
--
,,,^..^,,,
On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 11:10 PM, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
> On 25 March 2012 20:41, Alexander Shorin <kx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Dave,
>>
>> Windows 2003 R2 x86
>> Chrome 16
>> All tests passed (with one known exception).
>> Rolling update haven't change CouchDB version (was
>> 1.2.0a-0d8ddc8-git), so I have to uninstall old one and then install
>> the rc to admit changes in version string. Not sure if it had updated
>> correctly first time.
>
> Hi Alex,
>
> Thanks for testing!
>
> What do you mean by rolling update, and where do you see this?
>
>> Also have noted that installer stats require for system restart on
>> each operation. Why? I see nothing that could require it and 1.1.1 had
>> not required that while 0.9 and 0.10 was almost portable. Have used
>> R15B version if it does matter.
>> If this is not critical behavior, so +1, but it could be better(:
>
> The correct approach for Windows atm is uninstall & then reinstall.
>
> It shouldn't require a restart if you uninstall prior. How were
> you doing this? And what's your idea for improving it?
>
> BTW do you have any results on testing especially the pgp key was
> valid, and if any malware was present?
>
> http://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
>
> Thanks!
> Dave
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries, round 3
Posted by Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz>.
On 25 March 2012 20:41, Alexander Shorin <kx...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Dave,
>
> Windows 2003 R2 x86
> Chrome 16
> All tests passed (with one known exception).
> Rolling update haven't change CouchDB version (was
> 1.2.0a-0d8ddc8-git), so I have to uninstall old one and then install
> the rc to admit changes in version string. Not sure if it had updated
> correctly first time.
Hi Alex,
Thanks for testing!
What do you mean by rolling update, and where do you see this?
> Also have noted that installer stats require for system restart on
> each operation. Why? I see nothing that could require it and 1.1.1 had
> not required that while 0.9 and 0.10 was almost portable. Have used
> R15B version if it does matter.
> If this is not critical behavior, so +1, but it could be better(:
The correct approach for Windows atm is uninstall & then reinstall.
It shouldn't require a restart if you uninstall prior. How were
you doing this? And what's your idea for improving it?
BTW do you have any results on testing especially the pgp key was
valid, and if any malware was present?
http://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
Thanks!
Dave
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries, round 3
Posted by Alexander Shorin <kx...@gmail.com>.
Hi Dave,
Windows 2003 R2 x86
Chrome 16
All tests passed (with one known exception).
Rolling update haven't change CouchDB version (was
1.2.0a-0d8ddc8-git), so I have to uninstall old one and then install
the rc to admit changes in version string. Not sure if it had updated
correctly first time.
Also have noted that installer stats require for system restart on
each operation. Why? I see nothing that could require it and 1.1.1 had
not required that while 0.9 and 0.10 was almost portable. Have used
R15B version if it does matter.
If this is not critical behavior, so +1, but it could be better(:
--
,,,^..^,,,
On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 9:49 PM, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to call a vote on the following Windows binaries based on
> the concurrent Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release artefact from git:
>
> 654768d32bae3639756c18b200582093aa51f349
>
> https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/
>
> These have been built using Microsoft SDK 7.1, and includes the
> following 3rd party code:
>
> Erlang R14B04 or R15B
> OpenSSL 0.9.8r
> wxWidgets 2.8.12
> Mozilla JavaScript 1.8.5
> cURL 7.23.1
> ICU 4.6.1
> Inno setup 5.4.3
>
> Please follow the test procedure before voting:
>
> https://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
>
> 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!
>
> A+
> Dave