You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@qpid.apache.org by Justin Ross <jr...@redhat.com> on 2012/02/22 23:48:05 UTC
0.16 release update - the alpha is out
Hi! The alpha, from revision 1292524, is now available at
http://people.apache.org/~jross/qpid-0.16-alpha/
Thanks to Ted and Andrew for helping me clear up some distribution issues.
I did test builds of the source components on Fedora 15 x86_64 and
encountered no problems.
Beta approaches. We will branch for 0.16 stabilization probably at the
end of next week.
Please test the new distribution on your platform and let me know what you
find. Thanks!
Justin
---
0.16 release page: https://cwiki.apache.org/qpid/016-release.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
Re: 0.16 release update - the alpha is out
Posted by Alan Conway <ac...@redhat.com>.
On 02/22/2012 05:48 PM, Justin Ross wrote:
> Hi! The alpha, from revision 1292524, is now available at
>
> http://people.apache.org/~jross/qpid-0.16-alpha/
>
> Thanks to Ted and Andrew for helping me clear up some distribution issues. I did
> test builds of the source components on Fedora 15 x86_64 and encountered no
> problems.
>
> Beta approaches. We will branch for 0.16 stabilization probably at the end of
> next week.
>
> Please test the new distribution on your platform and let me know what you find.
> Thanks!
>
Did you include this commit:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r1292587 | aconway | 2012-02-22 18:46:48 -0500 (Wed, 22 Feb 2012) | 2 lines
NO-JIRA: Fix error on windows "An operation was attempted on something that is
not a socket."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not yet sure if windows is healthy now, I still have trouble running the
tests but that may windows environment problems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
Re: 0.16 release update - the alpha is out
Posted by Gordon Sim <gs...@redhat.com>.
On 02/23/2012 03:54 PM, Justin Ross wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Feb 2012, Gordon Sim wrote:
>
>> On a more minor point, the qpid-cpp release tarball still uses 0.15 as
>> do those for qmf and tools and for the separate java client and broker
>> downloads. The python tarball uses 0.16.
>
> That's down to the various methods used to put version numbers in the
> dir names. The inconsistency will only be apparent for alphas; I
> manually fix it up for starting witht the beta.
Understood.
>> And while I'm on that topic, we have noted in the past some
>> inconsistencies between components. For example the c++ tarball
>> extracts to qpidc-0.16 [assuming the version number is corrected], the
>> qmf and tools tarballs extract to qpid-qmf-0.16 and qpid-tools-0.16,
>> python extracts to qpid-0.16-alpha (under which we have python and
>> specs), the java client-only download extracts to qpid-client-0.16 and
>> the java broker-only download extracts to qpid-broker-0.16. Is this
>> something that can be addressed simply? i.e. could we tweak the
>> directory names so that they look consistent? (Don't want to embark on
>> the whole svn layout reorg here, just exploring whether a simple
>> naming change for release artefacts is feasible).
>
> I think we could adjust the names, and I'd like to. If we can agree to
> rationalize things, I can produce another alpha distribution next week
> with the changes for review.
The actually downloadable tarballs themselves are I think quite
consistently and intuitively named. Perhaps therefore we could simply
follow that?
E.g. change qpidc-0.16 to qpid-cpp-0.16, change qpid-client-0.16 to
qpid-java-client-0.16, qpid-broker-0.16 to qpid-java-broker-0.16... (I
haven't checked recently, but I imagine the combined java one would then
be qpid-java-0.16)
The python one is perhaps the most controversial as it contains both the
spec and python dir. However if we changed from qpid-0.16-alpha to
qpid-python-client-0.16 it would be clearer I think. There may be better
suggestions of course...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
Re: 0.16 release update - the alpha is out
Posted by Justin Ross <jr...@redhat.com>.
On Thu, 23 Feb 2012, Gordon Sim wrote:
> On a more minor point, the qpid-cpp release tarball still uses 0.15 as do
> those for qmf and tools and for the separate java client and broker
> downloads. The python tarball uses 0.16.
That's down to the various methods used to put version numbers in the dir
names. The inconsistency will only be apparent for alphas; I manually fix
it up for starting witht the beta.
> And while I'm on that topic, we have noted in the past some inconsistencies
> between components. For example the c++ tarball extracts to qpidc-0.16
> [assuming the version number is corrected], the qmf and tools tarballs
> extract to qpid-qmf-0.16 and qpid-tools-0.16, python extracts to
> qpid-0.16-alpha (under which we have python and specs), the java client-only
> download extracts to qpid-client-0.16 and the java broker-only download
> extracts to qpid-broker-0.16. Is this something that can be addressed simply?
> i.e. could we tweak the directory names so that they look consistent? (Don't
> want to embark on the whole svn layout reorg here, just exploring whether a
> simple naming change for release artefacts is feasible).
I think we could adjust the names, and I'd like to. If we can agree to
rationalize things, I can produce another alpha distribution next week
with the changes for review.
Justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
Re: 0.16 release update - the alpha is out
Posted by Gordon Sim <gs...@redhat.com>.
On 02/22/2012 10:48 PM, Justin Ross wrote:
> Hi! The alpha, from revision 1292524, is now available at
>
> http://people.apache.org/~jross/qpid-0.16-alpha/
>
> Thanks to Ted and Andrew for helping me clear up some distribution
> issues. I did test builds of the source components on Fedora 15 x86_64
> and encountered no problems.
>
> Beta approaches. We will branch for 0.16 stabilization probably at the
> end of next week.
>
> Please test the new distribution on your platform and let me know what
> you find. Thanks!
Autotools build fails for me, looks like ha_tests.py is not in the
distribution list(?):
> make[3]: *** No rule to make target `ha_tests.py', needed by `check-TESTS'.
The cmake configuration also fails for me (fedora 12, cmake 2.6-patch 4,
perl 5.10):
> -- Found Perl: /usr/bin/perl
> -- Could NOT find PerlLibs (missing: PERL_LIBRARY PERL_INCLUDE_PATH)
> -- Could NOT find PerlLibs (missing: PERL_LIBRARY PERL_INCLUDE_PATH)
> CMake Error at bindings/qmf/python/CMakeLists.txt:39 (file):
> file does not recognize sub-command COPY
>
>
> -- Could NOT find PerlLibs (missing: PERL_LIBRARY PERL_INCLUDE_PATH)
> CMake Error at bindings/qmf2/python/CMakeLists.txt:39 (file):
> file does not recognize sub-command COPY
>
>
> -- Configuring incomplete, errors occurred!
On a more minor point, the qpid-cpp release tarball still uses 0.15 as
do those for qmf and tools and for the separate java client and broker
downloads. The python tarball uses 0.16.
And while I'm on that topic, we have noted in the past some
inconsistencies between components. For example the c++ tarball extracts
to qpidc-0.16 [assuming the version number is corrected], the qmf and
tools tarballs extract to qpid-qmf-0.16 and qpid-tools-0.16, python
extracts to qpid-0.16-alpha (under which we have python and specs), the
java client-only download extracts to qpid-client-0.16 and the java
broker-only download extracts to qpid-broker-0.16. Is this something
that can be addressed simply? i.e. could we tweak the directory names so
that they look consistent? (Don't want to embark on the whole svn layout
reorg here, just exploring whether a simple naming change for release
artefacts is feasible).
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org