You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@solr.apache.org by David Smiley <da...@gmail.com> on 2023/12/04 20:46:46 UTC
Solr 9.4.1
I plan to do a 9.4.1 release, especially based on this regression:
SOLR-17057 -- JSON Query regression; defType doesn't work in "params"
Proposed RC: in 48 hours. So now's the time to do some back-porting. I
need to merge that one above, for example.
Believe it or not, I have never done a release before! LOL it's true.
Well here goes nothing.
~ David
Re: Solr 9.4.1
Posted by David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>.
Thanks for backporting. Remember to update JIRA FixVersion for them
accordingly.
~ David
On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 7:27 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> I backported these bugfixes:
>
> SOLR-17039: Entropy calculation in bin/solr script fails in Docker due to
> missing 'bc' cmd (janhoy)
> SOLR-6853: Allow '/' characters in the text managed by Managed Resources
> API. (Nikita Rusetskii via Eric Pugh) (PR <
> https://github.com/apache/solr/pull/2117>)
>
> We should also backport all or some of the dependency upgrades currently
> in branch_9x which are not in branch_9_4. This list of commits after
> October 3rd was copied from my git log:
>
> Update dependency com.google.errorprone:error_prone_annotations to v2.23.0
> (#2035) Solr Bot* 24/10/2023, 20:45
> Update io.netty:* to v4.1.100.Final (#2013) Solr Bot* 23/10/2023, 22:16
> Update io.grpc:grpc-* to v1.59.0 (#2036) Solr Bot* 23/10/2023, 22:04
> Update org.apache.logging.log4j:* to v2.21.0 (#2037) Solr Bot* 23/10/2023,
> 21:40
> Update io.dropwizard.metrics:* to v4.2.21 (#2033) Solr Bot* 23/10/2023,
> 18:46
> Update dependency io.swagger.core.v3:swagger-annotations to v2.2.17
> (#2032) Solr Bot* 23/10/2023, 18:46
> Update dependency org.codehaus.woodstox:stax2-api to v4.2.2 (#2015) Solr
> Bot* 23/10/2023, 17:19
> Update dependency com.fasterxml.jackson:jackson-bom to v2.15.3 (#2031)
> Solr Bot* 23/10/2023, 17:08
> Update dependency com.github.spotbugs:spotbugs-annotations to v4.8.0
> (#2034) Solr Bot* 23/10/2023, 17:08
> Update dependency com.google.guava:guava to v32.1.3-jre (#2014) Solr Bot*
> 23/10/2023, 17:07
> Update dependency org.immutables:value-annotations to v2.10.0 (#2010) Solr
> Bot* 23/10/2023, 17:07
> Update dependency io.opentelemetry:opentelemetry-bom to v1.31.0 (#2009)
> Solr Bot* 23/10/2023, 17:07
> Update dependency org.semver4j:semver4j to v5.2.2 (#2008) Solr Bot*
> 23/10/2023, 17:07
> Update org.apache.zookeeper:* to v3.9.1 (#1989) Solr Bot* 10/10/2023, 22:03
> SOLR-17012: Update Apache Hadoop to 3.3.6 and Apache Curator to 5.5.0
> (#1743) Solr Bot* 05/10/2023, 01:25
> Update dependency com.google.cloud:google-cloud-bom to v0.204.0 (#1745)
> Solr Bot* 03/10/2023, 22:02
> Update io.grpc:grpc-* to v1.58.0 (#1769) Solr Bot* 03/10/2023, 20:46
>
> PS: Did you consider doing the 9.5.0 release instead of 9.4.1? It's been
> almost 2 months.
>
> Jan
>
> > 4. des. 2023 kl. 21:46 skrev David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > I plan to do a 9.4.1 release, especially based on this regression:
> > SOLR-17057 -- JSON Query regression; defType doesn't work in "params"
> >
> > Proposed RC: in 48 hours. So now's the time to do some back-porting. I
> > need to merge that one above, for example.
> >
> > Believe it or not, I have never done a release before! LOL it's true.
> > Well here goes nothing.
> >
> > ~ David
>
>
Re: Solr 9.4.1
Posted by Gus Heck <gu...@gmail.com>.
WRT the possibility of 9.5 I think the deadlock in
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-17060 should be a blocker for
9.5. If others agree we can mark it for that...
On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 9:55 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com> wrote:
> SolrBot had been failing for a long time (>1month), but I got it on track
> again. Normally it only files new PRs on Sundays, but I'm triggering that
> manually now to consider what other upgrades from the past month that we
> should put into 9.4.1.
>
> Please have a look at https://github.com/apache/solr/pulls/solrbot and
> consider which ones should be merged and backported.
>
> Jan
>
> > 8. des. 2023 kl. 14:59 skrev David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > I renamed that job to add "(Crave)"
> > https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Solr/job/Solr-Check-9.x%20(Crave)/ and
> > disabled it. I then I created a new job copied from the
> "Solr-check-main"
> > but branch_9x. Builds are hourly so we'll see how it goes.
> >
> > ~ David
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 10:08 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> PS: https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Solr/job/Solr-Check-9.x/ is also
> not
> >> running since 25 days as it was converted to Crave..
> >>
> >> Jan
> >>
> >>> 7. des. 2023 kl. 15:06 skrev David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>:
> >>>
> >>> I've been working with Uv on these glitches.
> >>> ~ David
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 2:47 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I backported ALL SolrBot PRs to branch_9_4, which brings the number of
> >>>> known CVEs down.
> >>>>
> >>>> I also have a few other dependency upgrades baking in PRs but
> >>>> unfortunately Crave has died so no PRs pass tests:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Run cd
> >>>>
> >>
> /crave-devspaces/pipeline/runs/${GITHUB_RUN_ID}_${GITHUB_RUN_NUMBER}/solr
> >>>>> Selecting project Solr (id:39)
> >>>>> Error: Process completed with exit code 1.
> >>>>
> >>>> Jan
> >>>>
> >>>>> 7. des. 2023 kl. 02:44 skrev David Smiley <david.w.smiley@gmail.com
> >:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Sounds good Eric. It's not clear when exactly a 9.4.1 RC will happen
> >> as
> >>>>> there are a couple security matters we're looking at.
> >>>>> ~ David
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 12:31 PM Eric Pugh <
> >>>> epugh@opensourceconnections.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Something that I’d like to get released ASAP is a fix to the
> bin/solr
> >>>> post
> >>>>>> command.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Our Ref Guide has a lot of mentions of using “bin/solr post -c tech
> >>>>>> products”, however I removed the -c parameter in favour of -url
> >>>> parameter.
> >>>>>> I think that was a mistake, and would like to restore the old -c
> >>>> parameter,
> >>>>>> and then make sure the Ref Guide is up to date.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This could be a 9.4.1 or 9.5 change.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Dec 6, 2023, at 10:31 AM, Jason Gerlowski <
> gerlowskija@gmail.com>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Good question - I'm still thinking through what makes the most
> sense
> >>>>>>> there. Let's continue discussion on SOLR-17100 if you've got
> >> thoughts!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 9:58 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Jason, what do you mean by "publishing" the clients?
> >>>>>>>> I suppose you don't mean pip and npm, but including them in the
> >> binary
> >>>>>>>> tarball for users to consume? Or can we perhaps keep them
> "internal"
> >>>>>> only
> >>>>>>>> for a few releases with no docs and no guarantees, only
> dog-fooding?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Jan
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 15:38 skrev Jason Gerlowski <
> >> gerlowskija@gmail.com
> >>>>> :
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I'd love to see a 9.5 go out sometime in January to get our new
> >>>> Python
> >>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>> Javascript clients in front of users. I'm willing to RM the
> >> release,
> >>>>>> or
> >>>>>>>>> share duties with you if you're interested David? Publishing the
> >> new
> >>>>>>>>> clients will require some changes to the release process, and I'd
> >>>> hate
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>> saddle someone else with ironing out whatever hiccups are likely
> to
> >>>>>> crop
> >>>>>>>> up.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> What do you guys think about doing 9.5 on a January-ish
> timeframe?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> That said, if someone else wants a 9.4.1 I don't want to get in
> the
> >>>> way
> >>>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>> that either. Jan's right that there'd still be value in a 9.4.1
> >> even
> >>>>>>>> with
> >>>>>>>>> a 9.5. I imagine the driving factor would be whether there's a
> >>>> willing
> >>>>>>>> RM
> >>>>>>>>> for 9.4.1
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 5:42 AM Jan Høydahl <
> jan.asf@cominvent.com>
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> The benefit of doing 9.4.1 now is that it won't have that
> unknown
> >>>>>>>>>> regression that may be lurking in branch_9x now, so it's a much
> >>>> easier
> >>>>>>>>>> upgrade path for 9.4.0 users.
> >>>>>>>>>> However, I feel a 9.5 should follow quickly after. There is
> always
> >>>>>> room
> >>>>>>>>>> for a 9.6, 9.7 etc if someone wants to promote newer features,
> we
> >>>>>> don't
> >>>>>>>>>> need to wait for a certain number of new features to release, in
> >> my
> >>>>>>>> mind it
> >>>>>>>>>> is enought that we have one very interesting feature, or that >2
> >>>>>> months
> >>>>>>>> has
> >>>>>>>>>> passed.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> I can help backport dependency upgrades.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Jan
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 05:50 skrev David Smiley <
> >>>> david.w.smiley@gmail.com
> >>>>>>> :
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Ideally I would have done a 9.4.1 earlier for that one issue...
> >>>> but I
> >>>>>>>>>>> didn't and kept feeling more and more guilty... so here we are.
> >>>> But
> >>>>>>>>>> really
> >>>>>>>>>>> I shouldn't feel too guilty; open-source is volunteering;
> doing a
> >>>>>> patch
> >>>>>>>>>>> release shouldn't be a required punishment for an unfortunate
> >> bug.
> >>>>>> It
> >>>>>>>>>>> wasn't even a feature I was using in my day-to-day; I was just
> >>>>>> helping
> >>>>>>>>>>> someone fix their problem.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> BTW a new Lucene release is close so we might to wait a bit on
> >> Solr
> >>>>>>>> 9.5,
> >>>>>>>>>> so
> >>>>>>>>>>> maybe we do this 9.4.1. That Lucene release also touches the
> >> index
> >>>>>>>>>> format
> >>>>>>>>>>> BTW.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> ~ David
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 8:50 PM Shawn Heisey
> >>>>>>>> <apache@elyograg.org.invalid
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/5/23 16:28, David Smiley wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I didn't know doing 9.5 was an option. If it still is, I
> would
> >>>>>>>> prefer
> >>>>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> do 9.5. What do people think?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> The 9.5.0 section of CHANGES.txt in main is not as big as that
> >> for
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 9.4.0, but it's not small either.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I do not know whether any of those changes are something that
> >> the
> >>>>>>>> author
> >>>>>>>>>>>> thinks needs to bake for a little while longer.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I run a branch_9x snapshot on my little tiny Solr install that
> >>>> gets
> >>>>>>>> its
> >>>>>>>>>>>> index from dovecot, and I update it frequently. It hasn't
> given
> >>>> me
> >>>>>>>> any
> >>>>>>>>>>>> trouble.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I say go for it. Someday I will do a release myself.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Shawn
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> _______________________
> >>>>>> Eric Pugh | Founder & CEO | OpenSource Connections, LLC |
> >> 434.466.1467 |
> >>>>>> http://www.opensourceconnections.com <
> >>>>>> http://www.opensourceconnections.com/> | My Free/Busy <
> >>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/eric-cal>
> >>>>>> Co-Author: Apache Solr Enterprise Search Server, 3rd Ed <
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> https://www.packtpub.com/big-data-and-business-intelligence/apache-solr-enterprise-search-server-third-edition-raw
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This e-mail and all contents, including attachments, is considered
> to
> >> be
> >>>>>> Company Confidential unless explicitly stated otherwise, regardless
> of
> >>>>>> whether attachments are marked as such.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
>
>
--
http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work)
https://a.co/d/b2sZLD9 (my fantasy fiction book)
Re: Solr 9.4.1
Posted by David Smiley <ds...@apache.org>.
Release notes:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SOLR/ReleaseNotes9_4_1
I made some small structural adjustments to the release notes. I prefer to
put the CHANGES link last so that you start reading the highlights and then
end with the CHANGES link for further details.
Since this is a patch release, I chose not to get into much details in the
release highlights. People can read CHANGES.txt for the details.
Ishan, SOLR-17112 had no PR so nothing to merge, so it will miss this
release unless you are super fast or there is another RC.
On Sun, Jan 7, 2024 at 2:23 PM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com> wrote:
> Done
>
> Jan
>
> > 7. jan. 2024 kl. 07:03 skrev David Smiley <ds...@apache.org>:
> >
> > Sure; thanks.
> >
> >> On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 3:29 PM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Should we include this bugfix?
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-16203
> >> I'm merging to branch_9x now...
> >>
> >> Jan
> >>
> >>>> 5. jan. 2024 kl. 17:14 skrev David Smiley <ds...@apache.org>:
> >>>
> >>> 9.4.1 is unblocked; bug fixes are now on the release branch. I plan to
> >>> pursue a RC soon (today/tomorrow). This is my first time.
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 9:53 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> SolrBot had been failing for a long time (>1month), but I got it on
> >> track
> >>>> again. Normally it only files new PRs on Sundays, but I'm triggering
> >> that
> >>>> manually now to consider what other upgrades from the past month that
> we
> >>>> should put into 9.4.1.
> >>>>
> >>>> Please have a look at https://github.com/apache/solr/pulls/solrbot
> and
> >>>> consider which ones should be merged and backported.
> >>>>
> >>>> Jan
> >>>>
> >>>>> 8. des. 2023 kl. 14:59 skrev David Smiley <david.w.smiley@gmail.com
> >:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I renamed that job to add "(Crave)"
> >>>>> https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Solr/job/Solr-Check-9.x%20(Crave)/
> >> and
> >>>>> disabled it. I then I created a new job copied from the
> >>>> "Solr-check-main"
> >>>>> but branch_9x. Builds are hourly so we'll see how it goes.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ~ David
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 10:08 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> PS: https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Solr/job/Solr-Check-9.x/ is
> also
> >>>> not
> >>>>>> running since 25 days as it was converted to Crave..
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Jan
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 7. des. 2023 kl. 15:06 skrev David Smiley <
> david.w.smiley@gmail.com
> >>> :
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I've been working with Uv on these glitches.
> >>>>>>> ~ David
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 2:47 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I backported ALL SolrBot PRs to branch_9_4, which brings the
> number
> >> of
> >>>>>>>> known CVEs down.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I also have a few other dependency upgrades baking in PRs but
> >>>>>>>> unfortunately Crave has died so no PRs pass tests:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Run cd
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> /crave-devspaces/pipeline/runs/${GITHUB_RUN_ID}_${GITHUB_RUN_NUMBER}/solr
> >>>>>>>>> Selecting project Solr (id:39)
> >>>>>>>>> Error: Process completed with exit code 1.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Jan
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> 7. des. 2023 kl. 02:44 skrev David Smiley <
> >> david.w.smiley@gmail.com
> >>>>> :
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Sounds good Eric. It's not clear when exactly a 9.4.1 RC will
> >> happen
> >>>>>> as
> >>>>>>>>> there are a couple security matters we're looking at.
> >>>>>>>>> ~ David
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 12:31 PM Eric Pugh <
> >>>>>>>> epugh@opensourceconnections.com>
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Something that I’d like to get released ASAP is a fix to the
> >>>> bin/solr
> >>>>>>>> post
> >>>>>>>>>> command.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Our Ref Guide has a lot of mentions of using “bin/solr post -c
> >> tech
> >>>>>>>>>> products”, however I removed the -c parameter in favour of -url
> >>>>>>>> parameter.
> >>>>>>>>>> I think that was a mistake, and would like to restore the old -c
> >>>>>>>> parameter,
> >>>>>>>>>> and then make sure the Ref Guide is up to date.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> This could be a 9.4.1 or 9.5 change.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Dec 6, 2023, at 10:31 AM, Jason Gerlowski <
> >>>> gerlowskija@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Good question - I'm still thinking through what makes the most
> >>>> sense
> >>>>>>>>>>> there. Let's continue discussion on SOLR-17100 if you've got
> >>>>>> thoughts!
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 9:58 AM Jan Høydahl <
> >> jan.asf@cominvent.com>
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Jason, what do you mean by "publishing" the clients?
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I suppose you don't mean pip and npm, but including them in
> the
> >>>>>> binary
> >>>>>>>>>>>> tarball for users to consume? Or can we perhaps keep them
> >>>> "internal"
> >>>>>>>>>> only
> >>>>>>>>>>>> for a few releases with no docs and no guarantees, only
> >>>> dog-fooding?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Jan
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 15:38 skrev Jason Gerlowski <
> >>>>>> gerlowskija@gmail.com
> >>>>>>>>> :
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd love to see a 9.5 go out sometime in January to get our
> new
> >>>>>>>> Python
> >>>>>>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Javascript clients in front of users. I'm willing to RM the
> >>>>>> release,
> >>>>>>>>>> or
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> share duties with you if you're interested David? Publishing
> >> the
> >>>>>> new
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> clients will require some changes to the release process, and
> >> I'd
> >>>>>>>> hate
> >>>>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> saddle someone else with ironing out whatever hiccups are
> >> likely
> >>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>> crop
> >>>>>>>>>>>> up.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you guys think about doing 9.5 on a January-ish
> >>>> timeframe?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> That said, if someone else wants a 9.4.1 I don't want to get
> in
> >>>> the
> >>>>>>>> way
> >>>>>>>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> that either. Jan's right that there'd still be value in a
> >> 9.4.1
> >>>>>> even
> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> a 9.5. I imagine the driving factor would be whether
> there's a
> >>>>>>>> willing
> >>>>>>>>>>>> RM
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> for 9.4.1
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 5:42 AM Jan Høydahl <
> >>>> jan.asf@cominvent.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The benefit of doing 9.4.1 now is that it won't have that
> >>>> unknown
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> regression that may be lurking in branch_9x now, so it's a
> >> much
> >>>>>>>> easier
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> upgrade path for 9.4.0 users.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> However, I feel a 9.5 should follow quickly after. There is
> >>>> always
> >>>>>>>>>> room
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a 9.6, 9.7 etc if someone wants to promote newer
> features,
> >>>> we
> >>>>>>>>>> don't
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> need to wait for a certain number of new features to
> release,
> >> in
> >>>>>> my
> >>>>>>>>>>>> mind it
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> is enought that we have one very interesting feature, or
> that
> >>> 2
> >>>>>>>>>> months
> >>>>>>>>>>>> has
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> passed.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I can help backport dependency upgrades.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jan
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 05:50 skrev David Smiley <
> >>>>>>>> david.w.smiley@gmail.com
> >>>>>>>>>>> :
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ideally I would have done a 9.4.1 earlier for that one
> >> issue...
> >>>>>>>> but I
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't and kept feeling more and more guilty... so here we
> >> are.
> >>>>>>>> But
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> really
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I shouldn't feel too guilty; open-source is volunteering;
> >>>> doing a
> >>>>>>>>>> patch
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release shouldn't be a required punishment for an
> unfortunate
> >>>>>> bug.
> >>>>>>>>>> It
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't even a feature I was using in my day-to-day; I was
> >> just
> >>>>>>>>>> helping
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> someone fix their problem.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BTW a new Lucene release is close so we might to wait a bit
> >> on
> >>>>>> Solr
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 9.5,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> so
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maybe we do this 9.4.1. That Lucene release also touches
> the
> >>>>>> index
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> format
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BTW.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ~ David
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 8:50 PM Shawn Heisey
> >>>>>>>>>>>> <apache@elyograg.org.invalid
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/5/23 16:28, David Smiley wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I didn't know doing 9.5 was an option. If it still is, I
> >>>> would
> >>>>>>>>>>>> prefer
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do 9.5. What do people think?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The 9.5.0 section of CHANGES.txt in main is not as big as
> >> that
> >>>>>> for
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 9.4.0, but it's not small either.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I do not know whether any of those changes are something
> >> that
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> author
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thinks needs to bake for a little while longer.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I run a branch_9x snapshot on my little tiny Solr install
> >> that
> >>>>>>>> gets
> >>>>>>>>>>>> its
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> index from dovecot, and I update it frequently. It hasn't
> >>>> given
> >>>>>>>> me
> >>>>>>>>>>>> any
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trouble.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I say go for it. Someday I will do a release myself.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Shawn
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> _______________________
> >>>>>>>>>> Eric Pugh | Founder & CEO | OpenSource Connections, LLC |
> >>>>>> 434.466.1467 |
> >>>>>>>>>> http://www.opensourceconnections.com <
> >>>>>>>>>> http://www.opensourceconnections.com/> | My Free/Busy <
> >>>>>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/eric-cal>
> >>>>>>>>>> Co-Author: Apache Solr Enterprise Search Server, 3rd Ed <
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> https://www.packtpub.com/big-data-and-business-intelligence/apache-solr-enterprise-search-server-third-edition-raw
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> This e-mail and all contents, including attachments, is
> considered
> >>>> to
> >>>>>> be
> >>>>>>>>>> Company Confidential unless explicitly stated otherwise,
> >> regardless
> >>>> of
> >>>>>>>>>> whether attachments are marked as such.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>
> >>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>
>
Re: Solr 9.4.1
Posted by Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>.
Done
Jan
> 7. jan. 2024 kl. 07:03 skrev David Smiley <ds...@apache.org>:
>
> Sure; thanks.
>
>> On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 3:29 PM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com> wrote:
>>
>> Should we include this bugfix?
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-16203
>> I'm merging to branch_9x now...
>>
>> Jan
>>
>>>> 5. jan. 2024 kl. 17:14 skrev David Smiley <ds...@apache.org>:
>>>
>>> 9.4.1 is unblocked; bug fixes are now on the release branch. I plan to
>>> pursue a RC soon (today/tomorrow). This is my first time.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 9:53 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> SolrBot had been failing for a long time (>1month), but I got it on
>> track
>>>> again. Normally it only files new PRs on Sundays, but I'm triggering
>> that
>>>> manually now to consider what other upgrades from the past month that we
>>>> should put into 9.4.1.
>>>>
>>>> Please have a look at https://github.com/apache/solr/pulls/solrbot and
>>>> consider which ones should be merged and backported.
>>>>
>>>> Jan
>>>>
>>>>> 8. des. 2023 kl. 14:59 skrev David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>:
>>>>>
>>>>> I renamed that job to add "(Crave)"
>>>>> https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Solr/job/Solr-Check-9.x%20(Crave)/
>> and
>>>>> disabled it. I then I created a new job copied from the
>>>> "Solr-check-main"
>>>>> but branch_9x. Builds are hourly so we'll see how it goes.
>>>>>
>>>>> ~ David
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 10:08 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> PS: https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Solr/job/Solr-Check-9.x/ is also
>>>> not
>>>>>> running since 25 days as it was converted to Crave..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 7. des. 2023 kl. 15:06 skrev David Smiley <david.w.smiley@gmail.com
>>> :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've been working with Uv on these glitches.
>>>>>>> ~ David
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 2:47 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I backported ALL SolrBot PRs to branch_9_4, which brings the number
>> of
>>>>>>>> known CVEs down.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I also have a few other dependency upgrades baking in PRs but
>>>>>>>> unfortunately Crave has died so no PRs pass tests:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Run cd
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>> /crave-devspaces/pipeline/runs/${GITHUB_RUN_ID}_${GITHUB_RUN_NUMBER}/solr
>>>>>>>>> Selecting project Solr (id:39)
>>>>>>>>> Error: Process completed with exit code 1.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 7. des. 2023 kl. 02:44 skrev David Smiley <
>> david.w.smiley@gmail.com
>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sounds good Eric. It's not clear when exactly a 9.4.1 RC will
>> happen
>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>> there are a couple security matters we're looking at.
>>>>>>>>> ~ David
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 12:31 PM Eric Pugh <
>>>>>>>> epugh@opensourceconnections.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Something that I’d like to get released ASAP is a fix to the
>>>> bin/solr
>>>>>>>> post
>>>>>>>>>> command.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Our Ref Guide has a lot of mentions of using “bin/solr post -c
>> tech
>>>>>>>>>> products”, however I removed the -c parameter in favour of -url
>>>>>>>> parameter.
>>>>>>>>>> I think that was a mistake, and would like to restore the old -c
>>>>>>>> parameter,
>>>>>>>>>> and then make sure the Ref Guide is up to date.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This could be a 9.4.1 or 9.5 change.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Dec 6, 2023, at 10:31 AM, Jason Gerlowski <
>>>> gerlowskija@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Good question - I'm still thinking through what makes the most
>>>> sense
>>>>>>>>>>> there. Let's continue discussion on SOLR-17100 if you've got
>>>>>> thoughts!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 9:58 AM Jan Høydahl <
>> jan.asf@cominvent.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Jason, what do you mean by "publishing" the clients?
>>>>>>>>>>>> I suppose you don't mean pip and npm, but including them in the
>>>>>> binary
>>>>>>>>>>>> tarball for users to consume? Or can we perhaps keep them
>>>> "internal"
>>>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>>>>> for a few releases with no docs and no guarantees, only
>>>> dog-fooding?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 15:38 skrev Jason Gerlowski <
>>>>>> gerlowskija@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd love to see a 9.5 go out sometime in January to get our new
>>>>>>>> Python
>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Javascript clients in front of users. I'm willing to RM the
>>>>>> release,
>>>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>>>>>> share duties with you if you're interested David? Publishing
>> the
>>>>>> new
>>>>>>>>>>>>> clients will require some changes to the release process, and
>> I'd
>>>>>>>> hate
>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> saddle someone else with ironing out whatever hiccups are
>> likely
>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> crop
>>>>>>>>>>>> up.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you guys think about doing 9.5 on a January-ish
>>>> timeframe?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> That said, if someone else wants a 9.4.1 I don't want to get in
>>>> the
>>>>>>>> way
>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that either. Jan's right that there'd still be value in a
>> 9.4.1
>>>>>> even
>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>>> a 9.5. I imagine the driving factor would be whether there's a
>>>>>>>> willing
>>>>>>>>>>>> RM
>>>>>>>>>>>>> for 9.4.1
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 5:42 AM Jan Høydahl <
>>>> jan.asf@cominvent.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The benefit of doing 9.4.1 now is that it won't have that
>>>> unknown
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> regression that may be lurking in branch_9x now, so it's a
>> much
>>>>>>>> easier
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> upgrade path for 9.4.0 users.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> However, I feel a 9.5 should follow quickly after. There is
>>>> always
>>>>>>>>>> room
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a 9.6, 9.7 etc if someone wants to promote newer features,
>>>> we
>>>>>>>>>> don't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> need to wait for a certain number of new features to release,
>> in
>>>>>> my
>>>>>>>>>>>> mind it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is enought that we have one very interesting feature, or that
>>> 2
>>>>>>>>>> months
>>>>>>>>>>>> has
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> passed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I can help backport dependency upgrades.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 05:50 skrev David Smiley <
>>>>>>>> david.w.smiley@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ideally I would have done a 9.4.1 earlier for that one
>> issue...
>>>>>>>> but I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't and kept feeling more and more guilty... so here we
>> are.
>>>>>>>> But
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> really
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I shouldn't feel too guilty; open-source is volunteering;
>>>> doing a
>>>>>>>>>> patch
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release shouldn't be a required punishment for an unfortunate
>>>>>> bug.
>>>>>>>>>> It
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't even a feature I was using in my day-to-day; I was
>> just
>>>>>>>>>> helping
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> someone fix their problem.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BTW a new Lucene release is close so we might to wait a bit
>> on
>>>>>> Solr
>>>>>>>>>>>> 9.5,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maybe we do this 9.4.1. That Lucene release also touches the
>>>>>> index
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> format
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BTW.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ~ David
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 8:50 PM Shawn Heisey
>>>>>>>>>>>> <apache@elyograg.org.invalid
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/5/23 16:28, David Smiley wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I didn't know doing 9.5 was an option. If it still is, I
>>>> would
>>>>>>>>>>>> prefer
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do 9.5. What do people think?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The 9.5.0 section of CHANGES.txt in main is not as big as
>> that
>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 9.4.0, but it's not small either.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I do not know whether any of those changes are something
>> that
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> author
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thinks needs to bake for a little while longer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I run a branch_9x snapshot on my little tiny Solr install
>> that
>>>>>>>> gets
>>>>>>>>>>>> its
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> index from dovecot, and I update it frequently. It hasn't
>>>> given
>>>>>>>> me
>>>>>>>>>>>> any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trouble.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I say go for it. Someday I will do a release myself.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Shawn
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________
>>>>>>>>>> Eric Pugh | Founder & CEO | OpenSource Connections, LLC |
>>>>>> 434.466.1467 |
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.opensourceconnections.com <
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.opensourceconnections.com/> | My Free/Busy <
>>>>>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/eric-cal>
>>>>>>>>>> Co-Author: Apache Solr Enterprise Search Server, 3rd Ed <
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>> https://www.packtpub.com/big-data-and-business-intelligence/apache-solr-enterprise-search-server-third-edition-raw
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This e-mail and all contents, including attachments, is considered
>>>> to
>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>>> Company Confidential unless explicitly stated otherwise,
>> regardless
>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>> whether attachments are marked as such.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
Re: Solr 9.4.1
Posted by Ishan Chattopadhyaya <ic...@gmail.com>.
Hi David,
I think we should include SOLR-17112 as well. On some systems, the bin/solr
script doesn't work properly.
Regards,
Ishan
On Sun, 7 Jan, 2024, 11:33 am David Smiley, <ds...@apache.org> wrote:
> Sure; thanks.
>
> On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 3:29 PM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com> wrote:
>
> > Should we include this bugfix?
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-16203
> > I'm merging to branch_9x now...
> >
> > Jan
> >
> > > 5. jan. 2024 kl. 17:14 skrev David Smiley <ds...@apache.org>:
> > >
> > > 9.4.1 is unblocked; bug fixes are now on the release branch. I plan to
> > > pursue a RC soon (today/tomorrow). This is my first time.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 9:53 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> SolrBot had been failing for a long time (>1month), but I got it on
> > track
> > >> again. Normally it only files new PRs on Sundays, but I'm triggering
> > that
> > >> manually now to consider what other upgrades from the past month that
> we
> > >> should put into 9.4.1.
> > >>
> > >> Please have a look at https://github.com/apache/solr/pulls/solrbot
> and
> > >> consider which ones should be merged and backported.
> > >>
> > >> Jan
> > >>
> > >>> 8. des. 2023 kl. 14:59 skrev David Smiley <david.w.smiley@gmail.com
> >:
> > >>>
> > >>> I renamed that job to add "(Crave)"
> > >>> https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Solr/job/Solr-Check-9.x%20(Crave)/
> > and
> > >>> disabled it. I then I created a new job copied from the
> > >> "Solr-check-main"
> > >>> but branch_9x. Builds are hourly so we'll see how it goes.
> > >>>
> > >>> ~ David
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 10:08 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> PS: https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Solr/job/Solr-Check-9.x/ is
> also
> > >> not
> > >>>> running since 25 days as it was converted to Crave..
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Jan
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> 7. des. 2023 kl. 15:06 skrev David Smiley <
> david.w.smiley@gmail.com
> > >:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I've been working with Uv on these glitches.
> > >>>>> ~ David
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 2:47 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> I backported ALL SolrBot PRs to branch_9_4, which brings the
> number
> > of
> > >>>>>> known CVEs down.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I also have a few other dependency upgrades baking in PRs but
> > >>>>>> unfortunately Crave has died so no PRs pass tests:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Run cd
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>
> > /crave-devspaces/pipeline/runs/${GITHUB_RUN_ID}_${GITHUB_RUN_NUMBER}/solr
> > >>>>>>> Selecting project Solr (id:39)
> > >>>>>>> Error: Process completed with exit code 1.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Jan
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> 7. des. 2023 kl. 02:44 skrev David Smiley <
> > david.w.smiley@gmail.com
> > >>> :
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Sounds good Eric. It's not clear when exactly a 9.4.1 RC will
> > happen
> > >>>> as
> > >>>>>>> there are a couple security matters we're looking at.
> > >>>>>>> ~ David
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 12:31 PM Eric Pugh <
> > >>>>>> epugh@opensourceconnections.com>
> > >>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Something that I’d like to get released ASAP is a fix to the
> > >> bin/solr
> > >>>>>> post
> > >>>>>>>> command.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Our Ref Guide has a lot of mentions of using “bin/solr post -c
> > tech
> > >>>>>>>> products”, however I removed the -c parameter in favour of -url
> > >>>>>> parameter.
> > >>>>>>>> I think that was a mistake, and would like to restore the old -c
> > >>>>>> parameter,
> > >>>>>>>> and then make sure the Ref Guide is up to date.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> This could be a 9.4.1 or 9.5 change.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> On Dec 6, 2023, at 10:31 AM, Jason Gerlowski <
> > >> gerlowskija@gmail.com>
> > >>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Good question - I'm still thinking through what makes the most
> > >> sense
> > >>>>>>>>> there. Let's continue discussion on SOLR-17100 if you've got
> > >>>> thoughts!
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 9:58 AM Jan Høydahl <
> > jan.asf@cominvent.com>
> > >>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> Jason, what do you mean by "publishing" the clients?
> > >>>>>>>>>> I suppose you don't mean pip and npm, but including them in
> the
> > >>>> binary
> > >>>>>>>>>> tarball for users to consume? Or can we perhaps keep them
> > >> "internal"
> > >>>>>>>> only
> > >>>>>>>>>> for a few releases with no docs and no guarantees, only
> > >> dog-fooding?
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> Jan
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 15:38 skrev Jason Gerlowski <
> > >>>> gerlowskija@gmail.com
> > >>>>>>> :
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> I'd love to see a 9.5 go out sometime in January to get our
> new
> > >>>>>> Python
> > >>>>>>>>>> and
> > >>>>>>>>>>> Javascript clients in front of users. I'm willing to RM the
> > >>>> release,
> > >>>>>>>> or
> > >>>>>>>>>>> share duties with you if you're interested David? Publishing
> > the
> > >>>> new
> > >>>>>>>>>>> clients will require some changes to the release process, and
> > I'd
> > >>>>>> hate
> > >>>>>>>> to
> > >>>>>>>>>>> saddle someone else with ironing out whatever hiccups are
> > likely
> > >> to
> > >>>>>>>> crop
> > >>>>>>>>>> up.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> What do you guys think about doing 9.5 on a January-ish
> > >> timeframe?
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> That said, if someone else wants a 9.4.1 I don't want to get
> in
> > >> the
> > >>>>>> way
> > >>>>>>>>>> of
> > >>>>>>>>>>> that either. Jan's right that there'd still be value in a
> > 9.4.1
> > >>>> even
> > >>>>>>>>>> with
> > >>>>>>>>>>> a 9.5. I imagine the driving factor would be whether
> there's a
> > >>>>>> willing
> > >>>>>>>>>> RM
> > >>>>>>>>>>> for 9.4.1
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 5:42 AM Jan Høydahl <
> > >> jan.asf@cominvent.com>
> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> The benefit of doing 9.4.1 now is that it won't have that
> > >> unknown
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> regression that may be lurking in branch_9x now, so it's a
> > much
> > >>>>>> easier
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> upgrade path for 9.4.0 users.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> However, I feel a 9.5 should follow quickly after. There is
> > >> always
> > >>>>>>>> room
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> for a 9.6, 9.7 etc if someone wants to promote newer
> features,
> > >> we
> > >>>>>>>> don't
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> need to wait for a certain number of new features to
> release,
> > in
> > >>>> my
> > >>>>>>>>>> mind it
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> is enought that we have one very interesting feature, or
> that
> > >2
> > >>>>>>>> months
> > >>>>>>>>>> has
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> passed.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I can help backport dependency upgrades.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Jan
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 05:50 skrev David Smiley <
> > >>>>>> david.w.smiley@gmail.com
> > >>>>>>>>> :
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Ideally I would have done a 9.4.1 earlier for that one
> > issue...
> > >>>>>> but I
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't and kept feeling more and more guilty... so here we
> > are.
> > >>>>>> But
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> really
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> I shouldn't feel too guilty; open-source is volunteering;
> > >> doing a
> > >>>>>>>> patch
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> release shouldn't be a required punishment for an
> unfortunate
> > >>>> bug.
> > >>>>>>>> It
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't even a feature I was using in my day-to-day; I was
> > just
> > >>>>>>>> helping
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> someone fix their problem.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> BTW a new Lucene release is close so we might to wait a bit
> > on
> > >>>> Solr
> > >>>>>>>>>> 9.5,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> so
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> maybe we do this 9.4.1. That Lucene release also touches
> the
> > >>>> index
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> format
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> BTW.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ~ David
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 8:50 PM Shawn Heisey
> > >>>>>>>>>> <apache@elyograg.org.invalid
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/5/23 16:28, David Smiley wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I didn't know doing 9.5 was an option. If it still is, I
> > >> would
> > >>>>>>>>>> prefer
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> to
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do 9.5. What do people think?
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The 9.5.0 section of CHANGES.txt in main is not as big as
> > that
> > >>>> for
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 9.4.0, but it's not small either.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I do not know whether any of those changes are something
> > that
> > >>>> the
> > >>>>>>>>>> author
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> thinks needs to bake for a little while longer.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I run a branch_9x snapshot on my little tiny Solr install
> > that
> > >>>>>> gets
> > >>>>>>>>>> its
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> index from dovecot, and I update it frequently. It hasn't
> > >> given
> > >>>>>> me
> > >>>>>>>>>> any
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> trouble.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I say go for it. Someday I will do a release myself.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Shawn
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> > >>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> _______________________
> > >>>>>>>> Eric Pugh | Founder & CEO | OpenSource Connections, LLC |
> > >>>> 434.466.1467 |
> > >>>>>>>> http://www.opensourceconnections.com <
> > >>>>>>>> http://www.opensourceconnections.com/> | My Free/Busy <
> > >>>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/eric-cal>
> > >>>>>>>> Co-Author: Apache Solr Enterprise Search Server, 3rd Ed <
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/big-data-and-business-intelligence/apache-solr-enterprise-search-server-third-edition-raw
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> This e-mail and all contents, including attachments, is
> considered
> > >> to
> > >>>> be
> > >>>>>>>> Company Confidential unless explicitly stated otherwise,
> > regardless
> > >> of
> > >>>>>>>> whether attachments are marked as such.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> > >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: Solr 9.4.1
Posted by David Smiley <ds...@apache.org>.
Sure; thanks.
On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 3:29 PM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com> wrote:
> Should we include this bugfix?
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-16203
> I'm merging to branch_9x now...
>
> Jan
>
> > 5. jan. 2024 kl. 17:14 skrev David Smiley <ds...@apache.org>:
> >
> > 9.4.1 is unblocked; bug fixes are now on the release branch. I plan to
> > pursue a RC soon (today/tomorrow). This is my first time.
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 9:53 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> SolrBot had been failing for a long time (>1month), but I got it on
> track
> >> again. Normally it only files new PRs on Sundays, but I'm triggering
> that
> >> manually now to consider what other upgrades from the past month that we
> >> should put into 9.4.1.
> >>
> >> Please have a look at https://github.com/apache/solr/pulls/solrbot and
> >> consider which ones should be merged and backported.
> >>
> >> Jan
> >>
> >>> 8. des. 2023 kl. 14:59 skrev David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>:
> >>>
> >>> I renamed that job to add "(Crave)"
> >>> https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Solr/job/Solr-Check-9.x%20(Crave)/
> and
> >>> disabled it. I then I created a new job copied from the
> >> "Solr-check-main"
> >>> but branch_9x. Builds are hourly so we'll see how it goes.
> >>>
> >>> ~ David
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 10:08 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> PS: https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Solr/job/Solr-Check-9.x/ is also
> >> not
> >>>> running since 25 days as it was converted to Crave..
> >>>>
> >>>> Jan
> >>>>
> >>>>> 7. des. 2023 kl. 15:06 skrev David Smiley <david.w.smiley@gmail.com
> >:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I've been working with Uv on these glitches.
> >>>>> ~ David
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 2:47 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> I backported ALL SolrBot PRs to branch_9_4, which brings the number
> of
> >>>>>> known CVEs down.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I also have a few other dependency upgrades baking in PRs but
> >>>>>> unfortunately Crave has died so no PRs pass tests:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Run cd
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> /crave-devspaces/pipeline/runs/${GITHUB_RUN_ID}_${GITHUB_RUN_NUMBER}/solr
> >>>>>>> Selecting project Solr (id:39)
> >>>>>>> Error: Process completed with exit code 1.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Jan
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 7. des. 2023 kl. 02:44 skrev David Smiley <
> david.w.smiley@gmail.com
> >>> :
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Sounds good Eric. It's not clear when exactly a 9.4.1 RC will
> happen
> >>>> as
> >>>>>>> there are a couple security matters we're looking at.
> >>>>>>> ~ David
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 12:31 PM Eric Pugh <
> >>>>>> epugh@opensourceconnections.com>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Something that I’d like to get released ASAP is a fix to the
> >> bin/solr
> >>>>>> post
> >>>>>>>> command.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Our Ref Guide has a lot of mentions of using “bin/solr post -c
> tech
> >>>>>>>> products”, however I removed the -c parameter in favour of -url
> >>>>>> parameter.
> >>>>>>>> I think that was a mistake, and would like to restore the old -c
> >>>>>> parameter,
> >>>>>>>> and then make sure the Ref Guide is up to date.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> This could be a 9.4.1 or 9.5 change.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Dec 6, 2023, at 10:31 AM, Jason Gerlowski <
> >> gerlowskija@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Good question - I'm still thinking through what makes the most
> >> sense
> >>>>>>>>> there. Let's continue discussion on SOLR-17100 if you've got
> >>>> thoughts!
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 9:58 AM Jan Høydahl <
> jan.asf@cominvent.com>
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Jason, what do you mean by "publishing" the clients?
> >>>>>>>>>> I suppose you don't mean pip and npm, but including them in the
> >>>> binary
> >>>>>>>>>> tarball for users to consume? Or can we perhaps keep them
> >> "internal"
> >>>>>>>> only
> >>>>>>>>>> for a few releases with no docs and no guarantees, only
> >> dog-fooding?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Jan
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 15:38 skrev Jason Gerlowski <
> >>>> gerlowskija@gmail.com
> >>>>>>> :
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> I'd love to see a 9.5 go out sometime in January to get our new
> >>>>>> Python
> >>>>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>>>> Javascript clients in front of users. I'm willing to RM the
> >>>> release,
> >>>>>>>> or
> >>>>>>>>>>> share duties with you if you're interested David? Publishing
> the
> >>>> new
> >>>>>>>>>>> clients will require some changes to the release process, and
> I'd
> >>>>>> hate
> >>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>> saddle someone else with ironing out whatever hiccups are
> likely
> >> to
> >>>>>>>> crop
> >>>>>>>>>> up.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> What do you guys think about doing 9.5 on a January-ish
> >> timeframe?
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> That said, if someone else wants a 9.4.1 I don't want to get in
> >> the
> >>>>>> way
> >>>>>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>>>> that either. Jan's right that there'd still be value in a
> 9.4.1
> >>>> even
> >>>>>>>>>> with
> >>>>>>>>>>> a 9.5. I imagine the driving factor would be whether there's a
> >>>>>> willing
> >>>>>>>>>> RM
> >>>>>>>>>>> for 9.4.1
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 5:42 AM Jan Høydahl <
> >> jan.asf@cominvent.com>
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> The benefit of doing 9.4.1 now is that it won't have that
> >> unknown
> >>>>>>>>>>>> regression that may be lurking in branch_9x now, so it's a
> much
> >>>>>> easier
> >>>>>>>>>>>> upgrade path for 9.4.0 users.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> However, I feel a 9.5 should follow quickly after. There is
> >> always
> >>>>>>>> room
> >>>>>>>>>>>> for a 9.6, 9.7 etc if someone wants to promote newer features,
> >> we
> >>>>>>>> don't
> >>>>>>>>>>>> need to wait for a certain number of new features to release,
> in
> >>>> my
> >>>>>>>>>> mind it
> >>>>>>>>>>>> is enought that we have one very interesting feature, or that
> >2
> >>>>>>>> months
> >>>>>>>>>> has
> >>>>>>>>>>>> passed.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I can help backport dependency upgrades.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Jan
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 05:50 skrev David Smiley <
> >>>>>> david.w.smiley@gmail.com
> >>>>>>>>> :
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Ideally I would have done a 9.4.1 earlier for that one
> issue...
> >>>>>> but I
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't and kept feeling more and more guilty... so here we
> are.
> >>>>>> But
> >>>>>>>>>>>> really
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I shouldn't feel too guilty; open-source is volunteering;
> >> doing a
> >>>>>>>> patch
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> release shouldn't be a required punishment for an unfortunate
> >>>> bug.
> >>>>>>>> It
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't even a feature I was using in my day-to-day; I was
> just
> >>>>>>>> helping
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> someone fix their problem.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> BTW a new Lucene release is close so we might to wait a bit
> on
> >>>> Solr
> >>>>>>>>>> 9.5,
> >>>>>>>>>>>> so
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> maybe we do this 9.4.1. That Lucene release also touches the
> >>>> index
> >>>>>>>>>>>> format
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> BTW.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ~ David
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 8:50 PM Shawn Heisey
> >>>>>>>>>> <apache@elyograg.org.invalid
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/5/23 16:28, David Smiley wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I didn't know doing 9.5 was an option. If it still is, I
> >> would
> >>>>>>>>>> prefer
> >>>>>>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do 9.5. What do people think?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The 9.5.0 section of CHANGES.txt in main is not as big as
> that
> >>>> for
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 9.4.0, but it's not small either.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I do not know whether any of those changes are something
> that
> >>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>> author
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> thinks needs to bake for a little while longer.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I run a branch_9x snapshot on my little tiny Solr install
> that
> >>>>>> gets
> >>>>>>>>>> its
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> index from dovecot, and I update it frequently. It hasn't
> >> given
> >>>>>> me
> >>>>>>>>>> any
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> trouble.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I say go for it. Someday I will do a release myself.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Shawn
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> _______________________
> >>>>>>>> Eric Pugh | Founder & CEO | OpenSource Connections, LLC |
> >>>> 434.466.1467 |
> >>>>>>>> http://www.opensourceconnections.com <
> >>>>>>>> http://www.opensourceconnections.com/> | My Free/Busy <
> >>>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/eric-cal>
> >>>>>>>> Co-Author: Apache Solr Enterprise Search Server, 3rd Ed <
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> https://www.packtpub.com/big-data-and-business-intelligence/apache-solr-enterprise-search-server-third-edition-raw
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> This e-mail and all contents, including attachments, is considered
> >> to
> >>>> be
> >>>>>>>> Company Confidential unless explicitly stated otherwise,
> regardless
> >> of
> >>>>>>>> whether attachments are marked as such.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>
>
Re: Solr 9.4.1
Posted by Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>.
Should we include this bugfix? https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-16203
I'm merging to branch_9x now...
Jan
> 5. jan. 2024 kl. 17:14 skrev David Smiley <ds...@apache.org>:
>
> 9.4.1 is unblocked; bug fixes are now on the release branch. I plan to
> pursue a RC soon (today/tomorrow). This is my first time.
>
> On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 9:53 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com> wrote:
>
>> SolrBot had been failing for a long time (>1month), but I got it on track
>> again. Normally it only files new PRs on Sundays, but I'm triggering that
>> manually now to consider what other upgrades from the past month that we
>> should put into 9.4.1.
>>
>> Please have a look at https://github.com/apache/solr/pulls/solrbot and
>> consider which ones should be merged and backported.
>>
>> Jan
>>
>>> 8. des. 2023 kl. 14:59 skrev David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>> I renamed that job to add "(Crave)"
>>> https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Solr/job/Solr-Check-9.x%20(Crave)/ and
>>> disabled it. I then I created a new job copied from the
>> "Solr-check-main"
>>> but branch_9x. Builds are hourly so we'll see how it goes.
>>>
>>> ~ David
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 10:08 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> PS: https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Solr/job/Solr-Check-9.x/ is also
>> not
>>>> running since 25 days as it was converted to Crave..
>>>>
>>>> Jan
>>>>
>>>>> 7. des. 2023 kl. 15:06 skrev David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>:
>>>>>
>>>>> I've been working with Uv on these glitches.
>>>>> ~ David
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 2:47 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I backported ALL SolrBot PRs to branch_9_4, which brings the number of
>>>>>> known CVEs down.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I also have a few other dependency upgrades baking in PRs but
>>>>>> unfortunately Crave has died so no PRs pass tests:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Run cd
>>>>>>
>>>>
>> /crave-devspaces/pipeline/runs/${GITHUB_RUN_ID}_${GITHUB_RUN_NUMBER}/solr
>>>>>>> Selecting project Solr (id:39)
>>>>>>> Error: Process completed with exit code 1.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 7. des. 2023 kl. 02:44 skrev David Smiley <david.w.smiley@gmail.com
>>> :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sounds good Eric. It's not clear when exactly a 9.4.1 RC will happen
>>>> as
>>>>>>> there are a couple security matters we're looking at.
>>>>>>> ~ David
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 12:31 PM Eric Pugh <
>>>>>> epugh@opensourceconnections.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Something that I’d like to get released ASAP is a fix to the
>> bin/solr
>>>>>> post
>>>>>>>> command.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Our Ref Guide has a lot of mentions of using “bin/solr post -c tech
>>>>>>>> products”, however I removed the -c parameter in favour of -url
>>>>>> parameter.
>>>>>>>> I think that was a mistake, and would like to restore the old -c
>>>>>> parameter,
>>>>>>>> and then make sure the Ref Guide is up to date.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This could be a 9.4.1 or 9.5 change.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Dec 6, 2023, at 10:31 AM, Jason Gerlowski <
>> gerlowskija@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Good question - I'm still thinking through what makes the most
>> sense
>>>>>>>>> there. Let's continue discussion on SOLR-17100 if you've got
>>>> thoughts!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 9:58 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Jason, what do you mean by "publishing" the clients?
>>>>>>>>>> I suppose you don't mean pip and npm, but including them in the
>>>> binary
>>>>>>>>>> tarball for users to consume? Or can we perhaps keep them
>> "internal"
>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>>> for a few releases with no docs and no guarantees, only
>> dog-fooding?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 15:38 skrev Jason Gerlowski <
>>>> gerlowskija@gmail.com
>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'd love to see a 9.5 go out sometime in January to get our new
>>>>>> Python
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>> Javascript clients in front of users. I'm willing to RM the
>>>> release,
>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>>>> share duties with you if you're interested David? Publishing the
>>>> new
>>>>>>>>>>> clients will require some changes to the release process, and I'd
>>>>>> hate
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>> saddle someone else with ironing out whatever hiccups are likely
>> to
>>>>>>>> crop
>>>>>>>>>> up.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What do you guys think about doing 9.5 on a January-ish
>> timeframe?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> That said, if someone else wants a 9.4.1 I don't want to get in
>> the
>>>>>> way
>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>> that either. Jan's right that there'd still be value in a 9.4.1
>>>> even
>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>> a 9.5. I imagine the driving factor would be whether there's a
>>>>>> willing
>>>>>>>>>> RM
>>>>>>>>>>> for 9.4.1
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 5:42 AM Jan Høydahl <
>> jan.asf@cominvent.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The benefit of doing 9.4.1 now is that it won't have that
>> unknown
>>>>>>>>>>>> regression that may be lurking in branch_9x now, so it's a much
>>>>>> easier
>>>>>>>>>>>> upgrade path for 9.4.0 users.
>>>>>>>>>>>> However, I feel a 9.5 should follow quickly after. There is
>> always
>>>>>>>> room
>>>>>>>>>>>> for a 9.6, 9.7 etc if someone wants to promote newer features,
>> we
>>>>>>>> don't
>>>>>>>>>>>> need to wait for a certain number of new features to release, in
>>>> my
>>>>>>>>>> mind it
>>>>>>>>>>>> is enought that we have one very interesting feature, or that >2
>>>>>>>> months
>>>>>>>>>> has
>>>>>>>>>>>> passed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I can help backport dependency upgrades.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 05:50 skrev David Smiley <
>>>>>> david.w.smiley@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ideally I would have done a 9.4.1 earlier for that one issue...
>>>>>> but I
>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't and kept feeling more and more guilty... so here we are.
>>>>>> But
>>>>>>>>>>>> really
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I shouldn't feel too guilty; open-source is volunteering;
>> doing a
>>>>>>>> patch
>>>>>>>>>>>>> release shouldn't be a required punishment for an unfortunate
>>>> bug.
>>>>>>>> It
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't even a feature I was using in my day-to-day; I was just
>>>>>>>> helping
>>>>>>>>>>>>> someone fix their problem.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> BTW a new Lucene release is close so we might to wait a bit on
>>>> Solr
>>>>>>>>>> 9.5,
>>>>>>>>>>>> so
>>>>>>>>>>>>> maybe we do this 9.4.1. That Lucene release also touches the
>>>> index
>>>>>>>>>>>> format
>>>>>>>>>>>>> BTW.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ~ David
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 8:50 PM Shawn Heisey
>>>>>>>>>> <apache@elyograg.org.invalid
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/5/23 16:28, David Smiley wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I didn't know doing 9.5 was an option. If it still is, I
>> would
>>>>>>>>>> prefer
>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do 9.5. What do people think?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The 9.5.0 section of CHANGES.txt in main is not as big as that
>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 9.4.0, but it's not small either.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I do not know whether any of those changes are something that
>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> author
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thinks needs to bake for a little while longer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I run a branch_9x snapshot on my little tiny Solr install that
>>>>>> gets
>>>>>>>>>> its
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> index from dovecot, and I update it frequently. It hasn't
>> given
>>>>>> me
>>>>>>>>>> any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trouble.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I say go for it. Someday I will do a release myself.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Shawn
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________
>>>>>>>> Eric Pugh | Founder & CEO | OpenSource Connections, LLC |
>>>> 434.466.1467 |
>>>>>>>> http://www.opensourceconnections.com <
>>>>>>>> http://www.opensourceconnections.com/> | My Free/Busy <
>>>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/eric-cal>
>>>>>>>> Co-Author: Apache Solr Enterprise Search Server, 3rd Ed <
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>> https://www.packtpub.com/big-data-and-business-intelligence/apache-solr-enterprise-search-server-third-edition-raw
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This e-mail and all contents, including attachments, is considered
>> to
>>>> be
>>>>>>>> Company Confidential unless explicitly stated otherwise, regardless
>> of
>>>>>>>> whether attachments are marked as such.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
Re: Solr 9.4.1
Posted by David Smiley <ds...@apache.org>.
9.4.1 is unblocked; bug fixes are now on the release branch. I plan to
pursue a RC soon (today/tomorrow). This is my first time.
On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 9:53 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com> wrote:
> SolrBot had been failing for a long time (>1month), but I got it on track
> again. Normally it only files new PRs on Sundays, but I'm triggering that
> manually now to consider what other upgrades from the past month that we
> should put into 9.4.1.
>
> Please have a look at https://github.com/apache/solr/pulls/solrbot and
> consider which ones should be merged and backported.
>
> Jan
>
> > 8. des. 2023 kl. 14:59 skrev David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > I renamed that job to add "(Crave)"
> > https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Solr/job/Solr-Check-9.x%20(Crave)/ and
> > disabled it. I then I created a new job copied from the
> "Solr-check-main"
> > but branch_9x. Builds are hourly so we'll see how it goes.
> >
> > ~ David
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 10:08 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> PS: https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Solr/job/Solr-Check-9.x/ is also
> not
> >> running since 25 days as it was converted to Crave..
> >>
> >> Jan
> >>
> >>> 7. des. 2023 kl. 15:06 skrev David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>:
> >>>
> >>> I've been working with Uv on these glitches.
> >>> ~ David
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 2:47 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I backported ALL SolrBot PRs to branch_9_4, which brings the number of
> >>>> known CVEs down.
> >>>>
> >>>> I also have a few other dependency upgrades baking in PRs but
> >>>> unfortunately Crave has died so no PRs pass tests:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Run cd
> >>>>
> >>
> /crave-devspaces/pipeline/runs/${GITHUB_RUN_ID}_${GITHUB_RUN_NUMBER}/solr
> >>>>> Selecting project Solr (id:39)
> >>>>> Error: Process completed with exit code 1.
> >>>>
> >>>> Jan
> >>>>
> >>>>> 7. des. 2023 kl. 02:44 skrev David Smiley <david.w.smiley@gmail.com
> >:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Sounds good Eric. It's not clear when exactly a 9.4.1 RC will happen
> >> as
> >>>>> there are a couple security matters we're looking at.
> >>>>> ~ David
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 12:31 PM Eric Pugh <
> >>>> epugh@opensourceconnections.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Something that I’d like to get released ASAP is a fix to the
> bin/solr
> >>>> post
> >>>>>> command.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Our Ref Guide has a lot of mentions of using “bin/solr post -c tech
> >>>>>> products”, however I removed the -c parameter in favour of -url
> >>>> parameter.
> >>>>>> I think that was a mistake, and would like to restore the old -c
> >>>> parameter,
> >>>>>> and then make sure the Ref Guide is up to date.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This could be a 9.4.1 or 9.5 change.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Dec 6, 2023, at 10:31 AM, Jason Gerlowski <
> gerlowskija@gmail.com>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Good question - I'm still thinking through what makes the most
> sense
> >>>>>>> there. Let's continue discussion on SOLR-17100 if you've got
> >> thoughts!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 9:58 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Jason, what do you mean by "publishing" the clients?
> >>>>>>>> I suppose you don't mean pip and npm, but including them in the
> >> binary
> >>>>>>>> tarball for users to consume? Or can we perhaps keep them
> "internal"
> >>>>>> only
> >>>>>>>> for a few releases with no docs and no guarantees, only
> dog-fooding?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Jan
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 15:38 skrev Jason Gerlowski <
> >> gerlowskija@gmail.com
> >>>>> :
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I'd love to see a 9.5 go out sometime in January to get our new
> >>>> Python
> >>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>> Javascript clients in front of users. I'm willing to RM the
> >> release,
> >>>>>> or
> >>>>>>>>> share duties with you if you're interested David? Publishing the
> >> new
> >>>>>>>>> clients will require some changes to the release process, and I'd
> >>>> hate
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>> saddle someone else with ironing out whatever hiccups are likely
> to
> >>>>>> crop
> >>>>>>>> up.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> What do you guys think about doing 9.5 on a January-ish
> timeframe?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> That said, if someone else wants a 9.4.1 I don't want to get in
> the
> >>>> way
> >>>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>> that either. Jan's right that there'd still be value in a 9.4.1
> >> even
> >>>>>>>> with
> >>>>>>>>> a 9.5. I imagine the driving factor would be whether there's a
> >>>> willing
> >>>>>>>> RM
> >>>>>>>>> for 9.4.1
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 5:42 AM Jan Høydahl <
> jan.asf@cominvent.com>
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> The benefit of doing 9.4.1 now is that it won't have that
> unknown
> >>>>>>>>>> regression that may be lurking in branch_9x now, so it's a much
> >>>> easier
> >>>>>>>>>> upgrade path for 9.4.0 users.
> >>>>>>>>>> However, I feel a 9.5 should follow quickly after. There is
> always
> >>>>>> room
> >>>>>>>>>> for a 9.6, 9.7 etc if someone wants to promote newer features,
> we
> >>>>>> don't
> >>>>>>>>>> need to wait for a certain number of new features to release, in
> >> my
> >>>>>>>> mind it
> >>>>>>>>>> is enought that we have one very interesting feature, or that >2
> >>>>>> months
> >>>>>>>> has
> >>>>>>>>>> passed.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> I can help backport dependency upgrades.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Jan
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 05:50 skrev David Smiley <
> >>>> david.w.smiley@gmail.com
> >>>>>>> :
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Ideally I would have done a 9.4.1 earlier for that one issue...
> >>>> but I
> >>>>>>>>>>> didn't and kept feeling more and more guilty... so here we are.
> >>>> But
> >>>>>>>>>> really
> >>>>>>>>>>> I shouldn't feel too guilty; open-source is volunteering;
> doing a
> >>>>>> patch
> >>>>>>>>>>> release shouldn't be a required punishment for an unfortunate
> >> bug.
> >>>>>> It
> >>>>>>>>>>> wasn't even a feature I was using in my day-to-day; I was just
> >>>>>> helping
> >>>>>>>>>>> someone fix their problem.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> BTW a new Lucene release is close so we might to wait a bit on
> >> Solr
> >>>>>>>> 9.5,
> >>>>>>>>>> so
> >>>>>>>>>>> maybe we do this 9.4.1. That Lucene release also touches the
> >> index
> >>>>>>>>>> format
> >>>>>>>>>>> BTW.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> ~ David
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 8:50 PM Shawn Heisey
> >>>>>>>> <apache@elyograg.org.invalid
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/5/23 16:28, David Smiley wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I didn't know doing 9.5 was an option. If it still is, I
> would
> >>>>>>>> prefer
> >>>>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> do 9.5. What do people think?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> The 9.5.0 section of CHANGES.txt in main is not as big as that
> >> for
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 9.4.0, but it's not small either.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I do not know whether any of those changes are something that
> >> the
> >>>>>>>> author
> >>>>>>>>>>>> thinks needs to bake for a little while longer.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I run a branch_9x snapshot on my little tiny Solr install that
> >>>> gets
> >>>>>>>> its
> >>>>>>>>>>>> index from dovecot, and I update it frequently. It hasn't
> given
> >>>> me
> >>>>>>>> any
> >>>>>>>>>>>> trouble.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I say go for it. Someday I will do a release myself.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Shawn
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> _______________________
> >>>>>> Eric Pugh | Founder & CEO | OpenSource Connections, LLC |
> >> 434.466.1467 |
> >>>>>> http://www.opensourceconnections.com <
> >>>>>> http://www.opensourceconnections.com/> | My Free/Busy <
> >>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/eric-cal>
> >>>>>> Co-Author: Apache Solr Enterprise Search Server, 3rd Ed <
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> https://www.packtpub.com/big-data-and-business-intelligence/apache-solr-enterprise-search-server-third-edition-raw
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This e-mail and all contents, including attachments, is considered
> to
> >> be
> >>>>>> Company Confidential unless explicitly stated otherwise, regardless
> of
> >>>>>> whether attachments are marked as such.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
>
>
Re: Solr 9.4.1
Posted by Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>.
SolrBot had been failing for a long time (>1month), but I got it on track again. Normally it only files new PRs on Sundays, but I'm triggering that manually now to consider what other upgrades from the past month that we should put into 9.4.1.
Please have a look at https://github.com/apache/solr/pulls/solrbot and consider which ones should be merged and backported.
Jan
> 8. des. 2023 kl. 14:59 skrev David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>:
>
> I renamed that job to add "(Crave)"
> https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Solr/job/Solr-Check-9.x%20(Crave)/ and
> disabled it. I then I created a new job copied from the "Solr-check-main"
> but branch_9x. Builds are hourly so we'll see how it goes.
>
> ~ David
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 10:08 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com> wrote:
>
>> PS: https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Solr/job/Solr-Check-9.x/ is also not
>> running since 25 days as it was converted to Crave..
>>
>> Jan
>>
>>> 7. des. 2023 kl. 15:06 skrev David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>> I've been working with Uv on these glitches.
>>> ~ David
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 2:47 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I backported ALL SolrBot PRs to branch_9_4, which brings the number of
>>>> known CVEs down.
>>>>
>>>> I also have a few other dependency upgrades baking in PRs but
>>>> unfortunately Crave has died so no PRs pass tests:
>>>>
>>>>> Run cd
>>>>
>> /crave-devspaces/pipeline/runs/${GITHUB_RUN_ID}_${GITHUB_RUN_NUMBER}/solr
>>>>> Selecting project Solr (id:39)
>>>>> Error: Process completed with exit code 1.
>>>>
>>>> Jan
>>>>
>>>>> 7. des. 2023 kl. 02:44 skrev David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>:
>>>>>
>>>>> Sounds good Eric. It's not clear when exactly a 9.4.1 RC will happen
>> as
>>>>> there are a couple security matters we're looking at.
>>>>> ~ David
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 12:31 PM Eric Pugh <
>>>> epugh@opensourceconnections.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Something that I’d like to get released ASAP is a fix to the bin/solr
>>>> post
>>>>>> command.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Our Ref Guide has a lot of mentions of using “bin/solr post -c tech
>>>>>> products”, however I removed the -c parameter in favour of -url
>>>> parameter.
>>>>>> I think that was a mistake, and would like to restore the old -c
>>>> parameter,
>>>>>> and then make sure the Ref Guide is up to date.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This could be a 9.4.1 or 9.5 change.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Dec 6, 2023, at 10:31 AM, Jason Gerlowski <ge...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Good question - I'm still thinking through what makes the most sense
>>>>>>> there. Let's continue discussion on SOLR-17100 if you've got
>> thoughts!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 9:58 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jason, what do you mean by "publishing" the clients?
>>>>>>>> I suppose you don't mean pip and npm, but including them in the
>> binary
>>>>>>>> tarball for users to consume? Or can we perhaps keep them "internal"
>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>> for a few releases with no docs and no guarantees, only dog-fooding?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 15:38 skrev Jason Gerlowski <
>> gerlowskija@gmail.com
>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'd love to see a 9.5 go out sometime in January to get our new
>>>> Python
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> Javascript clients in front of users. I'm willing to RM the
>> release,
>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>> share duties with you if you're interested David? Publishing the
>> new
>>>>>>>>> clients will require some changes to the release process, and I'd
>>>> hate
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> saddle someone else with ironing out whatever hiccups are likely to
>>>>>> crop
>>>>>>>> up.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What do you guys think about doing 9.5 on a January-ish timeframe?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That said, if someone else wants a 9.4.1 I don't want to get in the
>>>> way
>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>> that either. Jan's right that there'd still be value in a 9.4.1
>> even
>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>> a 9.5. I imagine the driving factor would be whether there's a
>>>> willing
>>>>>>>> RM
>>>>>>>>> for 9.4.1
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 5:42 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The benefit of doing 9.4.1 now is that it won't have that unknown
>>>>>>>>>> regression that may be lurking in branch_9x now, so it's a much
>>>> easier
>>>>>>>>>> upgrade path for 9.4.0 users.
>>>>>>>>>> However, I feel a 9.5 should follow quickly after. There is always
>>>>>> room
>>>>>>>>>> for a 9.6, 9.7 etc if someone wants to promote newer features, we
>>>>>> don't
>>>>>>>>>> need to wait for a certain number of new features to release, in
>> my
>>>>>>>> mind it
>>>>>>>>>> is enought that we have one very interesting feature, or that >2
>>>>>> months
>>>>>>>> has
>>>>>>>>>> passed.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I can help backport dependency upgrades.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 05:50 skrev David Smiley <
>>>> david.w.smiley@gmail.com
>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ideally I would have done a 9.4.1 earlier for that one issue...
>>>> but I
>>>>>>>>>>> didn't and kept feeling more and more guilty... so here we are.
>>>> But
>>>>>>>>>> really
>>>>>>>>>>> I shouldn't feel too guilty; open-source is volunteering; doing a
>>>>>> patch
>>>>>>>>>>> release shouldn't be a required punishment for an unfortunate
>> bug.
>>>>>> It
>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't even a feature I was using in my day-to-day; I was just
>>>>>> helping
>>>>>>>>>>> someone fix their problem.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> BTW a new Lucene release is close so we might to wait a bit on
>> Solr
>>>>>>>> 9.5,
>>>>>>>>>> so
>>>>>>>>>>> maybe we do this 9.4.1. That Lucene release also touches the
>> index
>>>>>>>>>> format
>>>>>>>>>>> BTW.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ~ David
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 8:50 PM Shawn Heisey
>>>>>>>> <apache@elyograg.org.invalid
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/5/23 16:28, David Smiley wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I didn't know doing 9.5 was an option. If it still is, I would
>>>>>>>> prefer
>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> do 9.5. What do people think?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The 9.5.0 section of CHANGES.txt in main is not as big as that
>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>> 9.4.0, but it's not small either.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I do not know whether any of those changes are something that
>> the
>>>>>>>> author
>>>>>>>>>>>> thinks needs to bake for a little while longer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I run a branch_9x snapshot on my little tiny Solr install that
>>>> gets
>>>>>>>> its
>>>>>>>>>>>> index from dovecot, and I update it frequently. It hasn't given
>>>> me
>>>>>>>> any
>>>>>>>>>>>> trouble.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I say go for it. Someday I will do a release myself.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Shawn
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________
>>>>>> Eric Pugh | Founder & CEO | OpenSource Connections, LLC |
>> 434.466.1467 |
>>>>>> http://www.opensourceconnections.com <
>>>>>> http://www.opensourceconnections.com/> | My Free/Busy <
>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/eric-cal>
>>>>>> Co-Author: Apache Solr Enterprise Search Server, 3rd Ed <
>>>>>>
>>>>
>> https://www.packtpub.com/big-data-and-business-intelligence/apache-solr-enterprise-search-server-third-edition-raw
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This e-mail and all contents, including attachments, is considered to
>> be
>>>>>> Company Confidential unless explicitly stated otherwise, regardless of
>>>>>> whether attachments are marked as such.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
Re: Solr 9.4.1
Posted by David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>.
I renamed that job to add "(Crave)"
https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Solr/job/Solr-Check-9.x%20(Crave)/ and
disabled it. I then I created a new job copied from the "Solr-check-main"
but branch_9x. Builds are hourly so we'll see how it goes.
~ David
On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 10:08 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com> wrote:
> PS: https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Solr/job/Solr-Check-9.x/ is also not
> running since 25 days as it was converted to Crave..
>
> Jan
>
> > 7. des. 2023 kl. 15:06 skrev David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > I've been working with Uv on these glitches.
> > ~ David
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 2:47 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> I backported ALL SolrBot PRs to branch_9_4, which brings the number of
> >> known CVEs down.
> >>
> >> I also have a few other dependency upgrades baking in PRs but
> >> unfortunately Crave has died so no PRs pass tests:
> >>
> >>> Run cd
> >>
> /crave-devspaces/pipeline/runs/${GITHUB_RUN_ID}_${GITHUB_RUN_NUMBER}/solr
> >>> Selecting project Solr (id:39)
> >>> Error: Process completed with exit code 1.
> >>
> >> Jan
> >>
> >>> 7. des. 2023 kl. 02:44 skrev David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>:
> >>>
> >>> Sounds good Eric. It's not clear when exactly a 9.4.1 RC will happen
> as
> >>> there are a couple security matters we're looking at.
> >>> ~ David
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 12:31 PM Eric Pugh <
> >> epugh@opensourceconnections.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Something that I’d like to get released ASAP is a fix to the bin/solr
> >> post
> >>>> command.
> >>>>
> >>>> Our Ref Guide has a lot of mentions of using “bin/solr post -c tech
> >>>> products”, however I removed the -c parameter in favour of -url
> >> parameter.
> >>>> I think that was a mistake, and would like to restore the old -c
> >> parameter,
> >>>> and then make sure the Ref Guide is up to date.
> >>>>
> >>>> This could be a 9.4.1 or 9.5 change.
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Dec 6, 2023, at 10:31 AM, Jason Gerlowski <ge...@gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Good question - I'm still thinking through what makes the most sense
> >>>>> there. Let's continue discussion on SOLR-17100 if you've got
> thoughts!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 9:58 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Jason, what do you mean by "publishing" the clients?
> >>>>>> I suppose you don't mean pip and npm, but including them in the
> binary
> >>>>>> tarball for users to consume? Or can we perhaps keep them "internal"
> >>>> only
> >>>>>> for a few releases with no docs and no guarantees, only dog-fooding?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Jan
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 15:38 skrev Jason Gerlowski <
> gerlowskija@gmail.com
> >>> :
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I'd love to see a 9.5 go out sometime in January to get our new
> >> Python
> >>>>>> and
> >>>>>>> Javascript clients in front of users. I'm willing to RM the
> release,
> >>>> or
> >>>>>>> share duties with you if you're interested David? Publishing the
> new
> >>>>>>> clients will require some changes to the release process, and I'd
> >> hate
> >>>> to
> >>>>>>> saddle someone else with ironing out whatever hiccups are likely to
> >>>> crop
> >>>>>> up.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> What do you guys think about doing 9.5 on a January-ish timeframe?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> That said, if someone else wants a 9.4.1 I don't want to get in the
> >> way
> >>>>>> of
> >>>>>>> that either. Jan's right that there'd still be value in a 9.4.1
> even
> >>>>>> with
> >>>>>>> a 9.5. I imagine the driving factor would be whether there's a
> >> willing
> >>>>>> RM
> >>>>>>> for 9.4.1
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 5:42 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The benefit of doing 9.4.1 now is that it won't have that unknown
> >>>>>>>> regression that may be lurking in branch_9x now, so it's a much
> >> easier
> >>>>>>>> upgrade path for 9.4.0 users.
> >>>>>>>> However, I feel a 9.5 should follow quickly after. There is always
> >>>> room
> >>>>>>>> for a 9.6, 9.7 etc if someone wants to promote newer features, we
> >>>> don't
> >>>>>>>> need to wait for a certain number of new features to release, in
> my
> >>>>>> mind it
> >>>>>>>> is enought that we have one very interesting feature, or that >2
> >>>> months
> >>>>>> has
> >>>>>>>> passed.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I can help backport dependency upgrades.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Jan
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 05:50 skrev David Smiley <
> >> david.w.smiley@gmail.com
> >>>>> :
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Ideally I would have done a 9.4.1 earlier for that one issue...
> >> but I
> >>>>>>>>> didn't and kept feeling more and more guilty... so here we are.
> >> But
> >>>>>>>> really
> >>>>>>>>> I shouldn't feel too guilty; open-source is volunteering; doing a
> >>>> patch
> >>>>>>>>> release shouldn't be a required punishment for an unfortunate
> bug.
> >>>> It
> >>>>>>>>> wasn't even a feature I was using in my day-to-day; I was just
> >>>> helping
> >>>>>>>>> someone fix their problem.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> BTW a new Lucene release is close so we might to wait a bit on
> Solr
> >>>>>> 9.5,
> >>>>>>>> so
> >>>>>>>>> maybe we do this 9.4.1. That Lucene release also touches the
> index
> >>>>>>>> format
> >>>>>>>>> BTW.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> ~ David
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 8:50 PM Shawn Heisey
> >>>>>> <apache@elyograg.org.invalid
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On 12/5/23 16:28, David Smiley wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> I didn't know doing 9.5 was an option. If it still is, I would
> >>>>>> prefer
> >>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>> do 9.5. What do people think?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> The 9.5.0 section of CHANGES.txt in main is not as big as that
> for
> >>>>>>>>>> 9.4.0, but it's not small either.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> I do not know whether any of those changes are something that
> the
> >>>>>> author
> >>>>>>>>>> thinks needs to bake for a little while longer.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> I run a branch_9x snapshot on my little tiny Solr install that
> >> gets
> >>>>>> its
> >>>>>>>>>> index from dovecot, and I update it frequently. It hasn't given
> >> me
> >>>>>> any
> >>>>>>>>>> trouble.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> I say go for it. Someday I will do a release myself.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>>>> Shawn
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________
> >>>> Eric Pugh | Founder & CEO | OpenSource Connections, LLC |
> 434.466.1467 |
> >>>> http://www.opensourceconnections.com <
> >>>> http://www.opensourceconnections.com/> | My Free/Busy <
> >>>> http://tinyurl.com/eric-cal>
> >>>> Co-Author: Apache Solr Enterprise Search Server, 3rd Ed <
> >>>>
> >>
> https://www.packtpub.com/big-data-and-business-intelligence/apache-solr-enterprise-search-server-third-edition-raw
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> This e-mail and all contents, including attachments, is considered to
> be
> >>>> Company Confidential unless explicitly stated otherwise, regardless of
> >>>> whether attachments are marked as such.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>
> >>
>
>
Re: Solr 9.4.1
Posted by Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>.
PS: https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Solr/job/Solr-Check-9.x/ is also not running since 25 days as it was converted to Crave..
Jan
> 7. des. 2023 kl. 15:06 skrev David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>:
>
> I've been working with Uv on these glitches.
> ~ David
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 2:47 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com> wrote:
>
>> I backported ALL SolrBot PRs to branch_9_4, which brings the number of
>> known CVEs down.
>>
>> I also have a few other dependency upgrades baking in PRs but
>> unfortunately Crave has died so no PRs pass tests:
>>
>>> Run cd
>> /crave-devspaces/pipeline/runs/${GITHUB_RUN_ID}_${GITHUB_RUN_NUMBER}/solr
>>> Selecting project Solr (id:39)
>>> Error: Process completed with exit code 1.
>>
>> Jan
>>
>>> 7. des. 2023 kl. 02:44 skrev David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>> Sounds good Eric. It's not clear when exactly a 9.4.1 RC will happen as
>>> there are a couple security matters we're looking at.
>>> ~ David
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 12:31 PM Eric Pugh <
>> epugh@opensourceconnections.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Something that I’d like to get released ASAP is a fix to the bin/solr
>> post
>>>> command.
>>>>
>>>> Our Ref Guide has a lot of mentions of using “bin/solr post -c tech
>>>> products”, however I removed the -c parameter in favour of -url
>> parameter.
>>>> I think that was a mistake, and would like to restore the old -c
>> parameter,
>>>> and then make sure the Ref Guide is up to date.
>>>>
>>>> This could be a 9.4.1 or 9.5 change.
>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 6, 2023, at 10:31 AM, Jason Gerlowski <ge...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Good question - I'm still thinking through what makes the most sense
>>>>> there. Let's continue discussion on SOLR-17100 if you've got thoughts!
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 9:58 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Jason, what do you mean by "publishing" the clients?
>>>>>> I suppose you don't mean pip and npm, but including them in the binary
>>>>>> tarball for users to consume? Or can we perhaps keep them "internal"
>>>> only
>>>>>> for a few releases with no docs and no guarantees, only dog-fooding?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 15:38 skrev Jason Gerlowski <gerlowskija@gmail.com
>>> :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd love to see a 9.5 go out sometime in January to get our new
>> Python
>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> Javascript clients in front of users. I'm willing to RM the release,
>>>> or
>>>>>>> share duties with you if you're interested David? Publishing the new
>>>>>>> clients will require some changes to the release process, and I'd
>> hate
>>>> to
>>>>>>> saddle someone else with ironing out whatever hiccups are likely to
>>>> crop
>>>>>> up.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What do you guys think about doing 9.5 on a January-ish timeframe?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That said, if someone else wants a 9.4.1 I don't want to get in the
>> way
>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> that either. Jan's right that there'd still be value in a 9.4.1 even
>>>>>> with
>>>>>>> a 9.5. I imagine the driving factor would be whether there's a
>> willing
>>>>>> RM
>>>>>>> for 9.4.1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 5:42 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The benefit of doing 9.4.1 now is that it won't have that unknown
>>>>>>>> regression that may be lurking in branch_9x now, so it's a much
>> easier
>>>>>>>> upgrade path for 9.4.0 users.
>>>>>>>> However, I feel a 9.5 should follow quickly after. There is always
>>>> room
>>>>>>>> for a 9.6, 9.7 etc if someone wants to promote newer features, we
>>>> don't
>>>>>>>> need to wait for a certain number of new features to release, in my
>>>>>> mind it
>>>>>>>> is enought that we have one very interesting feature, or that >2
>>>> months
>>>>>> has
>>>>>>>> passed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I can help backport dependency upgrades.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 05:50 skrev David Smiley <
>> david.w.smiley@gmail.com
>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ideally I would have done a 9.4.1 earlier for that one issue...
>> but I
>>>>>>>>> didn't and kept feeling more and more guilty... so here we are.
>> But
>>>>>>>> really
>>>>>>>>> I shouldn't feel too guilty; open-source is volunteering; doing a
>>>> patch
>>>>>>>>> release shouldn't be a required punishment for an unfortunate bug.
>>>> It
>>>>>>>>> wasn't even a feature I was using in my day-to-day; I was just
>>>> helping
>>>>>>>>> someone fix their problem.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> BTW a new Lucene release is close so we might to wait a bit on Solr
>>>>>> 9.5,
>>>>>>>> so
>>>>>>>>> maybe we do this 9.4.1. That Lucene release also touches the index
>>>>>>>> format
>>>>>>>>> BTW.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ~ David
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 8:50 PM Shawn Heisey
>>>>>> <apache@elyograg.org.invalid
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 12/5/23 16:28, David Smiley wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> I didn't know doing 9.5 was an option. If it still is, I would
>>>>>> prefer
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>> do 9.5. What do people think?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The 9.5.0 section of CHANGES.txt in main is not as big as that for
>>>>>>>>>> 9.4.0, but it's not small either.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I do not know whether any of those changes are something that the
>>>>>> author
>>>>>>>>>> thinks needs to bake for a little while longer.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I run a branch_9x snapshot on my little tiny Solr install that
>> gets
>>>>>> its
>>>>>>>>>> index from dovecot, and I update it frequently. It hasn't given
>> me
>>>>>> any
>>>>>>>>>> trouble.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I say go for it. Someday I will do a release myself.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>> Shawn
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________
>>>> Eric Pugh | Founder & CEO | OpenSource Connections, LLC | 434.466.1467 |
>>>> http://www.opensourceconnections.com <
>>>> http://www.opensourceconnections.com/> | My Free/Busy <
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/eric-cal>
>>>> Co-Author: Apache Solr Enterprise Search Server, 3rd Ed <
>>>>
>> https://www.packtpub.com/big-data-and-business-intelligence/apache-solr-enterprise-search-server-third-edition-raw
>>>
>>>>
>>>> This e-mail and all contents, including attachments, is considered to be
>>>> Company Confidential unless explicitly stated otherwise, regardless of
>>>> whether attachments are marked as such.
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>>
>>
Re: Solr 9.4.1
Posted by David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>.
I've been working with Uv on these glitches.
~ David
On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 2:47 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com> wrote:
> I backported ALL SolrBot PRs to branch_9_4, which brings the number of
> known CVEs down.
>
> I also have a few other dependency upgrades baking in PRs but
> unfortunately Crave has died so no PRs pass tests:
>
> > Run cd
> /crave-devspaces/pipeline/runs/${GITHUB_RUN_ID}_${GITHUB_RUN_NUMBER}/solr
> > Selecting project Solr (id:39)
> > Error: Process completed with exit code 1.
>
> Jan
>
> > 7. des. 2023 kl. 02:44 skrev David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > Sounds good Eric. It's not clear when exactly a 9.4.1 RC will happen as
> > there are a couple security matters we're looking at.
> > ~ David
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 12:31 PM Eric Pugh <
> epugh@opensourceconnections.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Something that I’d like to get released ASAP is a fix to the bin/solr
> post
> >> command.
> >>
> >> Our Ref Guide has a lot of mentions of using “bin/solr post -c tech
> >> products”, however I removed the -c parameter in favour of -url
> parameter.
> >> I think that was a mistake, and would like to restore the old -c
> parameter,
> >> and then make sure the Ref Guide is up to date.
> >>
> >> This could be a 9.4.1 or 9.5 change.
> >>
> >>> On Dec 6, 2023, at 10:31 AM, Jason Gerlowski <ge...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Good question - I'm still thinking through what makes the most sense
> >>> there. Let's continue discussion on SOLR-17100 if you've got thoughts!
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 9:58 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Jason, what do you mean by "publishing" the clients?
> >>>> I suppose you don't mean pip and npm, but including them in the binary
> >>>> tarball for users to consume? Or can we perhaps keep them "internal"
> >> only
> >>>> for a few releases with no docs and no guarantees, only dog-fooding?
> >>>>
> >>>> Jan
> >>>>
> >>>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 15:38 skrev Jason Gerlowski <gerlowskija@gmail.com
> >:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'd love to see a 9.5 go out sometime in January to get our new
> Python
> >>>> and
> >>>>> Javascript clients in front of users. I'm willing to RM the release,
> >> or
> >>>>> share duties with you if you're interested David? Publishing the new
> >>>>> clients will require some changes to the release process, and I'd
> hate
> >> to
> >>>>> saddle someone else with ironing out whatever hiccups are likely to
> >> crop
> >>>> up.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What do you guys think about doing 9.5 on a January-ish timeframe?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> That said, if someone else wants a 9.4.1 I don't want to get in the
> way
> >>>> of
> >>>>> that either. Jan's right that there'd still be value in a 9.4.1 even
> >>>> with
> >>>>> a 9.5. I imagine the driving factor would be whether there's a
> willing
> >>>> RM
> >>>>> for 9.4.1
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 5:42 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> The benefit of doing 9.4.1 now is that it won't have that unknown
> >>>>>> regression that may be lurking in branch_9x now, so it's a much
> easier
> >>>>>> upgrade path for 9.4.0 users.
> >>>>>> However, I feel a 9.5 should follow quickly after. There is always
> >> room
> >>>>>> for a 9.6, 9.7 etc if someone wants to promote newer features, we
> >> don't
> >>>>>> need to wait for a certain number of new features to release, in my
> >>>> mind it
> >>>>>> is enought that we have one very interesting feature, or that >2
> >> months
> >>>> has
> >>>>>> passed.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I can help backport dependency upgrades.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Jan
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 05:50 skrev David Smiley <
> david.w.smiley@gmail.com
> >>> :
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Ideally I would have done a 9.4.1 earlier for that one issue...
> but I
> >>>>>>> didn't and kept feeling more and more guilty... so here we are.
> But
> >>>>>> really
> >>>>>>> I shouldn't feel too guilty; open-source is volunteering; doing a
> >> patch
> >>>>>>> release shouldn't be a required punishment for an unfortunate bug.
> >> It
> >>>>>>> wasn't even a feature I was using in my day-to-day; I was just
> >> helping
> >>>>>>> someone fix their problem.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> BTW a new Lucene release is close so we might to wait a bit on Solr
> >>>> 9.5,
> >>>>>> so
> >>>>>>> maybe we do this 9.4.1. That Lucene release also touches the index
> >>>>>> format
> >>>>>>> BTW.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> ~ David
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 8:50 PM Shawn Heisey
> >>>> <apache@elyograg.org.invalid
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 12/5/23 16:28, David Smiley wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> I didn't know doing 9.5 was an option. If it still is, I would
> >>>> prefer
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>> do 9.5. What do people think?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The 9.5.0 section of CHANGES.txt in main is not as big as that for
> >>>>>>>> 9.4.0, but it's not small either.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I do not know whether any of those changes are something that the
> >>>> author
> >>>>>>>> thinks needs to bake for a little while longer.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I run a branch_9x snapshot on my little tiny Solr install that
> gets
> >>>> its
> >>>>>>>> index from dovecot, and I update it frequently. It hasn't given
> me
> >>>> any
> >>>>>>>> trouble.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I say go for it. Someday I will do a release myself.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>> Shawn
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >> _______________________
> >> Eric Pugh | Founder & CEO | OpenSource Connections, LLC | 434.466.1467 |
> >> http://www.opensourceconnections.com <
> >> http://www.opensourceconnections.com/> | My Free/Busy <
> >> http://tinyurl.com/eric-cal>
> >> Co-Author: Apache Solr Enterprise Search Server, 3rd Ed <
> >>
> https://www.packtpub.com/big-data-and-business-intelligence/apache-solr-enterprise-search-server-third-edition-raw
> >
> >>
> >> This e-mail and all contents, including attachments, is considered to be
> >> Company Confidential unless explicitly stated otherwise, regardless of
> >> whether attachments are marked as such.
> >>
> >>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>
>
Re: Solr 9.4.1
Posted by Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>.
I backported ALL SolrBot PRs to branch_9_4, which brings the number of known CVEs down.
I also have a few other dependency upgrades baking in PRs but unfortunately Crave has died so no PRs pass tests:
> Run cd /crave-devspaces/pipeline/runs/${GITHUB_RUN_ID}_${GITHUB_RUN_NUMBER}/solr
> Selecting project Solr (id:39)
> Error: Process completed with exit code 1.
Jan
> 7. des. 2023 kl. 02:44 skrev David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>:
>
> Sounds good Eric. It's not clear when exactly a 9.4.1 RC will happen as
> there are a couple security matters we're looking at.
> ~ David
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 12:31 PM Eric Pugh <ep...@opensourceconnections.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Something that I’d like to get released ASAP is a fix to the bin/solr post
>> command.
>>
>> Our Ref Guide has a lot of mentions of using “bin/solr post -c tech
>> products”, however I removed the -c parameter in favour of -url parameter.
>> I think that was a mistake, and would like to restore the old -c parameter,
>> and then make sure the Ref Guide is up to date.
>>
>> This could be a 9.4.1 or 9.5 change.
>>
>>> On Dec 6, 2023, at 10:31 AM, Jason Gerlowski <ge...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Good question - I'm still thinking through what makes the most sense
>>> there. Let's continue discussion on SOLR-17100 if you've got thoughts!
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 9:58 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jason, what do you mean by "publishing" the clients?
>>>> I suppose you don't mean pip and npm, but including them in the binary
>>>> tarball for users to consume? Or can we perhaps keep them "internal"
>> only
>>>> for a few releases with no docs and no guarantees, only dog-fooding?
>>>>
>>>> Jan
>>>>
>>>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 15:38 skrev Jason Gerlowski <ge...@gmail.com>:
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd love to see a 9.5 go out sometime in January to get our new Python
>>>> and
>>>>> Javascript clients in front of users. I'm willing to RM the release,
>> or
>>>>> share duties with you if you're interested David? Publishing the new
>>>>> clients will require some changes to the release process, and I'd hate
>> to
>>>>> saddle someone else with ironing out whatever hiccups are likely to
>> crop
>>>> up.
>>>>>
>>>>> What do you guys think about doing 9.5 on a January-ish timeframe?
>>>>>
>>>>> That said, if someone else wants a 9.4.1 I don't want to get in the way
>>>> of
>>>>> that either. Jan's right that there'd still be value in a 9.4.1 even
>>>> with
>>>>> a 9.5. I imagine the driving factor would be whether there's a willing
>>>> RM
>>>>> for 9.4.1
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 5:42 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The benefit of doing 9.4.1 now is that it won't have that unknown
>>>>>> regression that may be lurking in branch_9x now, so it's a much easier
>>>>>> upgrade path for 9.4.0 users.
>>>>>> However, I feel a 9.5 should follow quickly after. There is always
>> room
>>>>>> for a 9.6, 9.7 etc if someone wants to promote newer features, we
>> don't
>>>>>> need to wait for a certain number of new features to release, in my
>>>> mind it
>>>>>> is enought that we have one very interesting feature, or that >2
>> months
>>>> has
>>>>>> passed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I can help backport dependency upgrades.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 05:50 skrev David Smiley <david.w.smiley@gmail.com
>>> :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ideally I would have done a 9.4.1 earlier for that one issue... but I
>>>>>>> didn't and kept feeling more and more guilty... so here we are. But
>>>>>> really
>>>>>>> I shouldn't feel too guilty; open-source is volunteering; doing a
>> patch
>>>>>>> release shouldn't be a required punishment for an unfortunate bug.
>> It
>>>>>>> wasn't even a feature I was using in my day-to-day; I was just
>> helping
>>>>>>> someone fix their problem.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BTW a new Lucene release is close so we might to wait a bit on Solr
>>>> 9.5,
>>>>>> so
>>>>>>> maybe we do this 9.4.1. That Lucene release also touches the index
>>>>>> format
>>>>>>> BTW.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ~ David
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 8:50 PM Shawn Heisey
>>>> <apache@elyograg.org.invalid
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 12/5/23 16:28, David Smiley wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I didn't know doing 9.5 was an option. If it still is, I would
>>>> prefer
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> do 9.5. What do people think?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The 9.5.0 section of CHANGES.txt in main is not as big as that for
>>>>>>>> 9.4.0, but it's not small either.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I do not know whether any of those changes are something that the
>>>> author
>>>>>>>> thinks needs to bake for a little while longer.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I run a branch_9x snapshot on my little tiny Solr install that gets
>>>> its
>>>>>>>> index from dovecot, and I update it frequently. It hasn't given me
>>>> any
>>>>>>>> trouble.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I say go for it. Someday I will do a release myself.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> Shawn
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>> _______________________
>> Eric Pugh | Founder & CEO | OpenSource Connections, LLC | 434.466.1467 |
>> http://www.opensourceconnections.com <
>> http://www.opensourceconnections.com/> | My Free/Busy <
>> http://tinyurl.com/eric-cal>
>> Co-Author: Apache Solr Enterprise Search Server, 3rd Ed <
>> https://www.packtpub.com/big-data-and-business-intelligence/apache-solr-enterprise-search-server-third-edition-raw>
>>
>> This e-mail and all contents, including attachments, is considered to be
>> Company Confidential unless explicitly stated otherwise, regardless of
>> whether attachments are marked as such.
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
Re: Solr 9.4.1
Posted by David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>.
Sounds good Eric. It's not clear when exactly a 9.4.1 RC will happen as
there are a couple security matters we're looking at.
~ David
On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 12:31 PM Eric Pugh <ep...@opensourceconnections.com>
wrote:
> Something that I’d like to get released ASAP is a fix to the bin/solr post
> command.
>
> Our Ref Guide has a lot of mentions of using “bin/solr post -c tech
> products”, however I removed the -c parameter in favour of -url parameter.
> I think that was a mistake, and would like to restore the old -c parameter,
> and then make sure the Ref Guide is up to date.
>
> This could be a 9.4.1 or 9.5 change.
>
> > On Dec 6, 2023, at 10:31 AM, Jason Gerlowski <ge...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Good question - I'm still thinking through what makes the most sense
> > there. Let's continue discussion on SOLR-17100 if you've got thoughts!
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 9:58 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Jason, what do you mean by "publishing" the clients?
> >> I suppose you don't mean pip and npm, but including them in the binary
> >> tarball for users to consume? Or can we perhaps keep them "internal"
> only
> >> for a few releases with no docs and no guarantees, only dog-fooding?
> >>
> >> Jan
> >>
> >>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 15:38 skrev Jason Gerlowski <ge...@gmail.com>:
> >>>
> >>> I'd love to see a 9.5 go out sometime in January to get our new Python
> >> and
> >>> Javascript clients in front of users. I'm willing to RM the release,
> or
> >>> share duties with you if you're interested David? Publishing the new
> >>> clients will require some changes to the release process, and I'd hate
> to
> >>> saddle someone else with ironing out whatever hiccups are likely to
> crop
> >> up.
> >>>
> >>> What do you guys think about doing 9.5 on a January-ish timeframe?
> >>>
> >>> That said, if someone else wants a 9.4.1 I don't want to get in the way
> >> of
> >>> that either. Jan's right that there'd still be value in a 9.4.1 even
> >> with
> >>> a 9.5. I imagine the driving factor would be whether there's a willing
> >> RM
> >>> for 9.4.1
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 5:42 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> The benefit of doing 9.4.1 now is that it won't have that unknown
> >>>> regression that may be lurking in branch_9x now, so it's a much easier
> >>>> upgrade path for 9.4.0 users.
> >>>> However, I feel a 9.5 should follow quickly after. There is always
> room
> >>>> for a 9.6, 9.7 etc if someone wants to promote newer features, we
> don't
> >>>> need to wait for a certain number of new features to release, in my
> >> mind it
> >>>> is enought that we have one very interesting feature, or that >2
> months
> >> has
> >>>> passed.
> >>>>
> >>>> I can help backport dependency upgrades.
> >>>>
> >>>> Jan
> >>>>
> >>>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 05:50 skrev David Smiley <david.w.smiley@gmail.com
> >:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Ideally I would have done a 9.4.1 earlier for that one issue... but I
> >>>>> didn't and kept feeling more and more guilty... so here we are. But
> >>>> really
> >>>>> I shouldn't feel too guilty; open-source is volunteering; doing a
> patch
> >>>>> release shouldn't be a required punishment for an unfortunate bug.
> It
> >>>>> wasn't even a feature I was using in my day-to-day; I was just
> helping
> >>>>> someone fix their problem.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> BTW a new Lucene release is close so we might to wait a bit on Solr
> >> 9.5,
> >>>> so
> >>>>> maybe we do this 9.4.1. That Lucene release also touches the index
> >>>> format
> >>>>> BTW.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ~ David
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 8:50 PM Shawn Heisey
> >> <apache@elyograg.org.invalid
> >>>>>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 12/5/23 16:28, David Smiley wrote:
> >>>>>>> I didn't know doing 9.5 was an option. If it still is, I would
> >> prefer
> >>>> to
> >>>>>>> do 9.5. What do people think?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The 9.5.0 section of CHANGES.txt in main is not as big as that for
> >>>>>> 9.4.0, but it's not small either.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I do not know whether any of those changes are something that the
> >> author
> >>>>>> thinks needs to bake for a little while longer.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I run a branch_9x snapshot on my little tiny Solr install that gets
> >> its
> >>>>>> index from dovecot, and I update it frequently. It hasn't given me
> >> any
> >>>>>> trouble.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I say go for it. Someday I will do a release myself.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>> Shawn
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>
> >>
>
> _______________________
> Eric Pugh | Founder & CEO | OpenSource Connections, LLC | 434.466.1467 |
> http://www.opensourceconnections.com <
> http://www.opensourceconnections.com/> | My Free/Busy <
> http://tinyurl.com/eric-cal>
> Co-Author: Apache Solr Enterprise Search Server, 3rd Ed <
> https://www.packtpub.com/big-data-and-business-intelligence/apache-solr-enterprise-search-server-third-edition-raw>
>
> This e-mail and all contents, including attachments, is considered to be
> Company Confidential unless explicitly stated otherwise, regardless of
> whether attachments are marked as such.
>
>
Re: Solr 9.4.1
Posted by Eric Pugh <ep...@opensourceconnections.com>.
Something that I’d like to get released ASAP is a fix to the bin/solr post command.
Our Ref Guide has a lot of mentions of using “bin/solr post -c tech products”, however I removed the -c parameter in favour of -url parameter. I think that was a mistake, and would like to restore the old -c parameter, and then make sure the Ref Guide is up to date.
This could be a 9.4.1 or 9.5 change.
> On Dec 6, 2023, at 10:31 AM, Jason Gerlowski <ge...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Good question - I'm still thinking through what makes the most sense
> there. Let's continue discussion on SOLR-17100 if you've got thoughts!
>
> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 9:58 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com> wrote:
>
>> Jason, what do you mean by "publishing" the clients?
>> I suppose you don't mean pip and npm, but including them in the binary
>> tarball for users to consume? Or can we perhaps keep them "internal" only
>> for a few releases with no docs and no guarantees, only dog-fooding?
>>
>> Jan
>>
>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 15:38 skrev Jason Gerlowski <ge...@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>> I'd love to see a 9.5 go out sometime in January to get our new Python
>> and
>>> Javascript clients in front of users. I'm willing to RM the release, or
>>> share duties with you if you're interested David? Publishing the new
>>> clients will require some changes to the release process, and I'd hate to
>>> saddle someone else with ironing out whatever hiccups are likely to crop
>> up.
>>>
>>> What do you guys think about doing 9.5 on a January-ish timeframe?
>>>
>>> That said, if someone else wants a 9.4.1 I don't want to get in the way
>> of
>>> that either. Jan's right that there'd still be value in a 9.4.1 even
>> with
>>> a 9.5. I imagine the driving factor would be whether there's a willing
>> RM
>>> for 9.4.1
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 5:42 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The benefit of doing 9.4.1 now is that it won't have that unknown
>>>> regression that may be lurking in branch_9x now, so it's a much easier
>>>> upgrade path for 9.4.0 users.
>>>> However, I feel a 9.5 should follow quickly after. There is always room
>>>> for a 9.6, 9.7 etc if someone wants to promote newer features, we don't
>>>> need to wait for a certain number of new features to release, in my
>> mind it
>>>> is enought that we have one very interesting feature, or that >2 months
>> has
>>>> passed.
>>>>
>>>> I can help backport dependency upgrades.
>>>>
>>>> Jan
>>>>
>>>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 05:50 skrev David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>:
>>>>>
>>>>> Ideally I would have done a 9.4.1 earlier for that one issue... but I
>>>>> didn't and kept feeling more and more guilty... so here we are. But
>>>> really
>>>>> I shouldn't feel too guilty; open-source is volunteering; doing a patch
>>>>> release shouldn't be a required punishment for an unfortunate bug. It
>>>>> wasn't even a feature I was using in my day-to-day; I was just helping
>>>>> someone fix their problem.
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW a new Lucene release is close so we might to wait a bit on Solr
>> 9.5,
>>>> so
>>>>> maybe we do this 9.4.1. That Lucene release also touches the index
>>>> format
>>>>> BTW.
>>>>>
>>>>> ~ David
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 8:50 PM Shawn Heisey
>> <apache@elyograg.org.invalid
>>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 12/5/23 16:28, David Smiley wrote:
>>>>>>> I didn't know doing 9.5 was an option. If it still is, I would
>> prefer
>>>> to
>>>>>>> do 9.5. What do people think?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The 9.5.0 section of CHANGES.txt in main is not as big as that for
>>>>>> 9.4.0, but it's not small either.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I do not know whether any of those changes are something that the
>> author
>>>>>> thinks needs to bake for a little while longer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I run a branch_9x snapshot on my little tiny Solr install that gets
>> its
>>>>>> index from dovecot, and I update it frequently. It hasn't given me
>> any
>>>>>> trouble.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I say go for it. Someday I will do a release myself.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Shawn
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>>
>>
_______________________
Eric Pugh | Founder & CEO | OpenSource Connections, LLC | 434.466.1467 | http://www.opensourceconnections.com <http://www.opensourceconnections.com/> | My Free/Busy <http://tinyurl.com/eric-cal>
Co-Author: Apache Solr Enterprise Search Server, 3rd Ed <https://www.packtpub.com/big-data-and-business-intelligence/apache-solr-enterprise-search-server-third-edition-raw>
This e-mail and all contents, including attachments, is considered to be Company Confidential unless explicitly stated otherwise, regardless of whether attachments are marked as such.
Re: Solr 9.4.1
Posted by Jason Gerlowski <ge...@gmail.com>.
Good question - I'm still thinking through what makes the most sense
there. Let's continue discussion on SOLR-17100 if you've got thoughts!
On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 9:58 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com> wrote:
> Jason, what do you mean by "publishing" the clients?
> I suppose you don't mean pip and npm, but including them in the binary
> tarball for users to consume? Or can we perhaps keep them "internal" only
> for a few releases with no docs and no guarantees, only dog-fooding?
>
> Jan
>
> > 6. des. 2023 kl. 15:38 skrev Jason Gerlowski <ge...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > I'd love to see a 9.5 go out sometime in January to get our new Python
> and
> > Javascript clients in front of users. I'm willing to RM the release, or
> > share duties with you if you're interested David? Publishing the new
> > clients will require some changes to the release process, and I'd hate to
> > saddle someone else with ironing out whatever hiccups are likely to crop
> up.
> >
> > What do you guys think about doing 9.5 on a January-ish timeframe?
> >
> > That said, if someone else wants a 9.4.1 I don't want to get in the way
> of
> > that either. Jan's right that there'd still be value in a 9.4.1 even
> with
> > a 9.5. I imagine the driving factor would be whether there's a willing
> RM
> > for 9.4.1
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 5:42 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> The benefit of doing 9.4.1 now is that it won't have that unknown
> >> regression that may be lurking in branch_9x now, so it's a much easier
> >> upgrade path for 9.4.0 users.
> >> However, I feel a 9.5 should follow quickly after. There is always room
> >> for a 9.6, 9.7 etc if someone wants to promote newer features, we don't
> >> need to wait for a certain number of new features to release, in my
> mind it
> >> is enought that we have one very interesting feature, or that >2 months
> has
> >> passed.
> >>
> >> I can help backport dependency upgrades.
> >>
> >> Jan
> >>
> >>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 05:50 skrev David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>:
> >>>
> >>> Ideally I would have done a 9.4.1 earlier for that one issue... but I
> >>> didn't and kept feeling more and more guilty... so here we are. But
> >> really
> >>> I shouldn't feel too guilty; open-source is volunteering; doing a patch
> >>> release shouldn't be a required punishment for an unfortunate bug. It
> >>> wasn't even a feature I was using in my day-to-day; I was just helping
> >>> someone fix their problem.
> >>>
> >>> BTW a new Lucene release is close so we might to wait a bit on Solr
> 9.5,
> >> so
> >>> maybe we do this 9.4.1. That Lucene release also touches the index
> >> format
> >>> BTW.
> >>>
> >>> ~ David
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 8:50 PM Shawn Heisey
> <apache@elyograg.org.invalid
> >>>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 12/5/23 16:28, David Smiley wrote:
> >>>>> I didn't know doing 9.5 was an option. If it still is, I would
> prefer
> >> to
> >>>>> do 9.5. What do people think?
> >>>>
> >>>> The 9.5.0 section of CHANGES.txt in main is not as big as that for
> >>>> 9.4.0, but it's not small either.
> >>>>
> >>>> I do not know whether any of those changes are something that the
> author
> >>>> thinks needs to bake for a little while longer.
> >>>>
> >>>> I run a branch_9x snapshot on my little tiny Solr install that gets
> its
> >>>> index from dovecot, and I update it frequently. It hasn't given me
> any
> >>>> trouble.
> >>>>
> >>>> I say go for it. Someday I will do a release myself.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> Shawn
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>
> >>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>
>
Re: Solr 9.4.1
Posted by Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>.
Jason, what do you mean by "publishing" the clients?
I suppose you don't mean pip and npm, but including them in the binary tarball for users to consume? Or can we perhaps keep them "internal" only for a few releases with no docs and no guarantees, only dog-fooding?
Jan
> 6. des. 2023 kl. 15:38 skrev Jason Gerlowski <ge...@gmail.com>:
>
> I'd love to see a 9.5 go out sometime in January to get our new Python and
> Javascript clients in front of users. I'm willing to RM the release, or
> share duties with you if you're interested David? Publishing the new
> clients will require some changes to the release process, and I'd hate to
> saddle someone else with ironing out whatever hiccups are likely to crop up.
>
> What do you guys think about doing 9.5 on a January-ish timeframe?
>
> That said, if someone else wants a 9.4.1 I don't want to get in the way of
> that either. Jan's right that there'd still be value in a 9.4.1 even with
> a 9.5. I imagine the driving factor would be whether there's a willing RM
> for 9.4.1
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 5:42 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com> wrote:
>
>> The benefit of doing 9.4.1 now is that it won't have that unknown
>> regression that may be lurking in branch_9x now, so it's a much easier
>> upgrade path for 9.4.0 users.
>> However, I feel a 9.5 should follow quickly after. There is always room
>> for a 9.6, 9.7 etc if someone wants to promote newer features, we don't
>> need to wait for a certain number of new features to release, in my mind it
>> is enought that we have one very interesting feature, or that >2 months has
>> passed.
>>
>> I can help backport dependency upgrades.
>>
>> Jan
>>
>>> 6. des. 2023 kl. 05:50 skrev David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>> Ideally I would have done a 9.4.1 earlier for that one issue... but I
>>> didn't and kept feeling more and more guilty... so here we are. But
>> really
>>> I shouldn't feel too guilty; open-source is volunteering; doing a patch
>>> release shouldn't be a required punishment for an unfortunate bug. It
>>> wasn't even a feature I was using in my day-to-day; I was just helping
>>> someone fix their problem.
>>>
>>> BTW a new Lucene release is close so we might to wait a bit on Solr 9.5,
>> so
>>> maybe we do this 9.4.1. That Lucene release also touches the index
>> format
>>> BTW.
>>>
>>> ~ David
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 8:50 PM Shawn Heisey <apache@elyograg.org.invalid
>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/5/23 16:28, David Smiley wrote:
>>>>> I didn't know doing 9.5 was an option. If it still is, I would prefer
>> to
>>>>> do 9.5. What do people think?
>>>>
>>>> The 9.5.0 section of CHANGES.txt in main is not as big as that for
>>>> 9.4.0, but it's not small either.
>>>>
>>>> I do not know whether any of those changes are something that the author
>>>> thinks needs to bake for a little while longer.
>>>>
>>>> I run a branch_9x snapshot on my little tiny Solr install that gets its
>>>> index from dovecot, and I update it frequently. It hasn't given me any
>>>> trouble.
>>>>
>>>> I say go for it. Someday I will do a release myself.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Shawn
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
Re: Solr 9.4.1
Posted by Jason Gerlowski <ge...@gmail.com>.
I'd love to see a 9.5 go out sometime in January to get our new Python and
Javascript clients in front of users. I'm willing to RM the release, or
share duties with you if you're interested David? Publishing the new
clients will require some changes to the release process, and I'd hate to
saddle someone else with ironing out whatever hiccups are likely to crop up.
What do you guys think about doing 9.5 on a January-ish timeframe?
That said, if someone else wants a 9.4.1 I don't want to get in the way of
that either. Jan's right that there'd still be value in a 9.4.1 even with
a 9.5. I imagine the driving factor would be whether there's a willing RM
for 9.4.1
On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 5:42 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com> wrote:
> The benefit of doing 9.4.1 now is that it won't have that unknown
> regression that may be lurking in branch_9x now, so it's a much easier
> upgrade path for 9.4.0 users.
> However, I feel a 9.5 should follow quickly after. There is always room
> for a 9.6, 9.7 etc if someone wants to promote newer features, we don't
> need to wait for a certain number of new features to release, in my mind it
> is enought that we have one very interesting feature, or that >2 months has
> passed.
>
> I can help backport dependency upgrades.
>
> Jan
>
> > 6. des. 2023 kl. 05:50 skrev David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > Ideally I would have done a 9.4.1 earlier for that one issue... but I
> > didn't and kept feeling more and more guilty... so here we are. But
> really
> > I shouldn't feel too guilty; open-source is volunteering; doing a patch
> > release shouldn't be a required punishment for an unfortunate bug. It
> > wasn't even a feature I was using in my day-to-day; I was just helping
> > someone fix their problem.
> >
> > BTW a new Lucene release is close so we might to wait a bit on Solr 9.5,
> so
> > maybe we do this 9.4.1. That Lucene release also touches the index
> format
> > BTW.
> >
> > ~ David
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 8:50 PM Shawn Heisey <apache@elyograg.org.invalid
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On 12/5/23 16:28, David Smiley wrote:
> >>> I didn't know doing 9.5 was an option. If it still is, I would prefer
> to
> >>> do 9.5. What do people think?
> >>
> >> The 9.5.0 section of CHANGES.txt in main is not as big as that for
> >> 9.4.0, but it's not small either.
> >>
> >> I do not know whether any of those changes are something that the author
> >> thinks needs to bake for a little while longer.
> >>
> >> I run a branch_9x snapshot on my little tiny Solr install that gets its
> >> index from dovecot, and I update it frequently. It hasn't given me any
> >> trouble.
> >>
> >> I say go for it. Someday I will do a release myself.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Shawn
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
> >>
> >>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>
>
Re: Solr 9.4.1
Posted by Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>.
The benefit of doing 9.4.1 now is that it won't have that unknown regression that may be lurking in branch_9x now, so it's a much easier upgrade path for 9.4.0 users.
However, I feel a 9.5 should follow quickly after. There is always room for a 9.6, 9.7 etc if someone wants to promote newer features, we don't need to wait for a certain number of new features to release, in my mind it is enought that we have one very interesting feature, or that >2 months has passed.
I can help backport dependency upgrades.
Jan
> 6. des. 2023 kl. 05:50 skrev David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>:
>
> Ideally I would have done a 9.4.1 earlier for that one issue... but I
> didn't and kept feeling more and more guilty... so here we are. But really
> I shouldn't feel too guilty; open-source is volunteering; doing a patch
> release shouldn't be a required punishment for an unfortunate bug. It
> wasn't even a feature I was using in my day-to-day; I was just helping
> someone fix their problem.
>
> BTW a new Lucene release is close so we might to wait a bit on Solr 9.5, so
> maybe we do this 9.4.1. That Lucene release also touches the index format
> BTW.
>
> ~ David
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 8:50 PM Shawn Heisey <ap...@elyograg.org.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> On 12/5/23 16:28, David Smiley wrote:
>>> I didn't know doing 9.5 was an option. If it still is, I would prefer to
>>> do 9.5. What do people think?
>>
>> The 9.5.0 section of CHANGES.txt in main is not as big as that for
>> 9.4.0, but it's not small either.
>>
>> I do not know whether any of those changes are something that the author
>> thinks needs to bake for a little while longer.
>>
>> I run a branch_9x snapshot on my little tiny Solr install that gets its
>> index from dovecot, and I update it frequently. It hasn't given me any
>> trouble.
>>
>> I say go for it. Someday I will do a release myself.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Shawn
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
Re: Solr 9.4.1
Posted by Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>.
The benefit of doing 9.4.1 now is that it won't have that unknown regression that may be lurking in branch_9x now, so it's a much easier upgrade path for 9.4.0 users.
However, I feel a 9.5 should follow quickly after. There is always room for a 9.6, 9.7 etc if someone wants to promote newer features, we don't need to wait for a certain number of new features to release, in my mind it is enought that we have one very interesting feature, or that >2 months has passed.
I can help backport dependency upgrades.
Jan
> 6. des. 2023 kl. 05:50 skrev David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>:
>
> Ideally I would have done a 9.4.1 earlier for that one issue... but I
> didn't and kept feeling more and more guilty... so here we are. But really
> I shouldn't feel too guilty; open-source is volunteering; doing a patch
> release shouldn't be a required punishment for an unfortunate bug. It
> wasn't even a feature I was using in my day-to-day; I was just helping
> someone fix their problem.
>
> BTW a new Lucene release is close so we might to wait a bit on Solr 9.5, so
> maybe we do this 9.4.1. That Lucene release also touches the index format
> BTW.
>
> ~ David
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 8:50 PM Shawn Heisey <ap...@elyograg.org.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> On 12/5/23 16:28, David Smiley wrote:
>>> I didn't know doing 9.5 was an option. If it still is, I would prefer to
>>> do 9.5. What do people think?
>>
>> The 9.5.0 section of CHANGES.txt in main is not as big as that for
>> 9.4.0, but it's not small either.
>>
>> I do not know whether any of those changes are something that the author
>> thinks needs to bake for a little while longer.
>>
>> I run a branch_9x snapshot on my little tiny Solr install that gets its
>> index from dovecot, and I update it frequently. It hasn't given me any
>> trouble.
>>
>> I say go for it. Someday I will do a release myself.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Shawn
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
Re: Solr 9.4.1
Posted by David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>.
Ideally I would have done a 9.4.1 earlier for that one issue... but I
didn't and kept feeling more and more guilty... so here we are. But really
I shouldn't feel too guilty; open-source is volunteering; doing a patch
release shouldn't be a required punishment for an unfortunate bug. It
wasn't even a feature I was using in my day-to-day; I was just helping
someone fix their problem.
BTW a new Lucene release is close so we might to wait a bit on Solr 9.5, so
maybe we do this 9.4.1. That Lucene release also touches the index format
BTW.
~ David
On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 8:50 PM Shawn Heisey <ap...@elyograg.org.invalid>
wrote:
> On 12/5/23 16:28, David Smiley wrote:
> > I didn't know doing 9.5 was an option. If it still is, I would prefer to
> > do 9.5. What do people think?
>
> The 9.5.0 section of CHANGES.txt in main is not as big as that for
> 9.4.0, but it's not small either.
>
> I do not know whether any of those changes are something that the author
> thinks needs to bake for a little while longer.
>
> I run a branch_9x snapshot on my little tiny Solr install that gets its
> index from dovecot, and I update it frequently. It hasn't given me any
> trouble.
>
> I say go for it. Someday I will do a release myself.
>
> Thanks,
> Shawn
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
>
>
Re: Solr 9.4.1
Posted by Shawn Heisey <ap...@elyograg.org.INVALID>.
On 12/5/23 16:28, David Smiley wrote:
> I didn't know doing 9.5 was an option. If it still is, I would prefer to
> do 9.5. What do people think?
The 9.5.0 section of CHANGES.txt in main is not as big as that for
9.4.0, but it's not small either.
I do not know whether any of those changes are something that the author
thinks needs to bake for a little while longer.
I run a branch_9x snapshot on my little tiny Solr install that gets its
index from dovecot, and I update it frequently. It hasn't given me any
trouble.
I say go for it. Someday I will do a release myself.
Thanks,
Shawn
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@solr.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@solr.apache.org
Re: Solr 9.4.1
Posted by David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>.
I didn't know doing 9.5 was an option. If it still is, I would prefer to
do 9.5. What do people think?
~ David
On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 7:27 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> I backported these bugfixes:
>
> SOLR-17039: Entropy calculation in bin/solr script fails in Docker due to
> missing 'bc' cmd (janhoy)
> SOLR-6853: Allow '/' characters in the text managed by Managed Resources
> API. (Nikita Rusetskii via Eric Pugh) (PR <
> https://github.com/apache/solr/pull/2117>)
>
> We should also backport all or some of the dependency upgrades currently
> in branch_9x which are not in branch_9_4. This list of commits after
> October 3rd was copied from my git log:
>
> Update dependency com.google.errorprone:error_prone_annotations to v2.23.0
> (#2035) Solr Bot* 24/10/2023, 20:45
> Update io.netty:* to v4.1.100.Final (#2013) Solr Bot* 23/10/2023, 22:16
> Update io.grpc:grpc-* to v1.59.0 (#2036) Solr Bot* 23/10/2023, 22:04
> Update org.apache.logging.log4j:* to v2.21.0 (#2037) Solr Bot* 23/10/2023,
> 21:40
> Update io.dropwizard.metrics:* to v4.2.21 (#2033) Solr Bot* 23/10/2023,
> 18:46
> Update dependency io.swagger.core.v3:swagger-annotations to v2.2.17
> (#2032) Solr Bot* 23/10/2023, 18:46
> Update dependency org.codehaus.woodstox:stax2-api to v4.2.2 (#2015) Solr
> Bot* 23/10/2023, 17:19
> Update dependency com.fasterxml.jackson:jackson-bom to v2.15.3 (#2031)
> Solr Bot* 23/10/2023, 17:08
> Update dependency com.github.spotbugs:spotbugs-annotations to v4.8.0
> (#2034) Solr Bot* 23/10/2023, 17:08
> Update dependency com.google.guava:guava to v32.1.3-jre (#2014) Solr Bot*
> 23/10/2023, 17:07
> Update dependency org.immutables:value-annotations to v2.10.0 (#2010) Solr
> Bot* 23/10/2023, 17:07
> Update dependency io.opentelemetry:opentelemetry-bom to v1.31.0 (#2009)
> Solr Bot* 23/10/2023, 17:07
> Update dependency org.semver4j:semver4j to v5.2.2 (#2008) Solr Bot*
> 23/10/2023, 17:07
> Update org.apache.zookeeper:* to v3.9.1 (#1989) Solr Bot* 10/10/2023, 22:03
> SOLR-17012: Update Apache Hadoop to 3.3.6 and Apache Curator to 5.5.0
> (#1743) Solr Bot* 05/10/2023, 01:25
> Update dependency com.google.cloud:google-cloud-bom to v0.204.0 (#1745)
> Solr Bot* 03/10/2023, 22:02
> Update io.grpc:grpc-* to v1.58.0 (#1769) Solr Bot* 03/10/2023, 20:46
>
> PS: Did you consider doing the 9.5.0 release instead of 9.4.1? It's been
> almost 2 months.
>
> Jan
>
> > 4. des. 2023 kl. 21:46 skrev David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > I plan to do a 9.4.1 release, especially based on this regression:
> > SOLR-17057 -- JSON Query regression; defType doesn't work in "params"
> >
> > Proposed RC: in 48 hours. So now's the time to do some back-porting. I
> > need to merge that one above, for example.
> >
> > Believe it or not, I have never done a release before! LOL it's true.
> > Well here goes nothing.
> >
> > ~ David
>
>
Re: Solr 9.4.1
Posted by Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>.
+1
I backported these bugfixes:
SOLR-17039: Entropy calculation in bin/solr script fails in Docker due to missing 'bc' cmd (janhoy)
SOLR-6853: Allow '/' characters in the text managed by Managed Resources API. (Nikita Rusetskii via Eric Pugh) (PR <https://github.com/apache/solr/pull/2117>)
We should also backport all or some of the dependency upgrades currently in branch_9x which are not in branch_9_4. This list of commits after October 3rd was copied from my git log:
Update dependency com.google.errorprone:error_prone_annotations to v2.23.0 (#2035) Solr Bot* 24/10/2023, 20:45
Update io.netty:* to v4.1.100.Final (#2013) Solr Bot* 23/10/2023, 22:16
Update io.grpc:grpc-* to v1.59.0 (#2036) Solr Bot* 23/10/2023, 22:04
Update org.apache.logging.log4j:* to v2.21.0 (#2037) Solr Bot* 23/10/2023, 21:40
Update io.dropwizard.metrics:* to v4.2.21 (#2033) Solr Bot* 23/10/2023, 18:46
Update dependency io.swagger.core.v3:swagger-annotations to v2.2.17 (#2032) Solr Bot* 23/10/2023, 18:46
Update dependency org.codehaus.woodstox:stax2-api to v4.2.2 (#2015) Solr Bot* 23/10/2023, 17:19
Update dependency com.fasterxml.jackson:jackson-bom to v2.15.3 (#2031) Solr Bot* 23/10/2023, 17:08
Update dependency com.github.spotbugs:spotbugs-annotations to v4.8.0 (#2034) Solr Bot* 23/10/2023, 17:08
Update dependency com.google.guava:guava to v32.1.3-jre (#2014) Solr Bot* 23/10/2023, 17:07
Update dependency org.immutables:value-annotations to v2.10.0 (#2010) Solr Bot* 23/10/2023, 17:07
Update dependency io.opentelemetry:opentelemetry-bom to v1.31.0 (#2009) Solr Bot* 23/10/2023, 17:07
Update dependency org.semver4j:semver4j to v5.2.2 (#2008) Solr Bot* 23/10/2023, 17:07
Update org.apache.zookeeper:* to v3.9.1 (#1989) Solr Bot* 10/10/2023, 22:03
SOLR-17012: Update Apache Hadoop to 3.3.6 and Apache Curator to 5.5.0 (#1743) Solr Bot* 05/10/2023, 01:25
Update dependency com.google.cloud:google-cloud-bom to v0.204.0 (#1745) Solr Bot* 03/10/2023, 22:02
Update io.grpc:grpc-* to v1.58.0 (#1769) Solr Bot* 03/10/2023, 20:46
PS: Did you consider doing the 9.5.0 release instead of 9.4.1? It's been almost 2 months.
Jan
> 4. des. 2023 kl. 21:46 skrev David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>:
>
> I plan to do a 9.4.1 release, especially based on this regression:
> SOLR-17057 -- JSON Query regression; defType doesn't work in "params"
>
> Proposed RC: in 48 hours. So now's the time to do some back-porting. I
> need to merge that one above, for example.
>
> Believe it or not, I have never done a release before! LOL it's true.
> Well here goes nothing.
>
> ~ David