You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@commons.apache.org by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> on 2010/03/22 01:27:03 UTC
[math] releasing 2.1 - compatibility breaks, site build failure
I have completed all of the code / doco changes that I see as
necessary for 2.1. While preparing an initial RC, I ran into two
issues, that I want to get consensus on before moving forward.
1) The clirr report is ugly
(http://commons.apache.org/math/clirr-report.html)
I was +1 on all of the breaks, which were all of the form "we got
the API definitions wrong on 2.0, few users are likely depending on
these APIs and we are fixing them now." I just want us all to
review the full set of compatibility breaks and decide that we can
release trunk as 2.0 (vs. 3.0 or try to retrofit).
2) I am still getting this nonsense from pmd with the latest
commons-parent (I am really sorry, Niall, that I did not get a
chance to test v. 14 prior to release)
[ERROR] FATAL ERROR
[INFO]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[INFO] Couldn't find that class The markup declarations contained or
pointed to by the document type declaration must be well-formed.
[INFO]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[INFO] Trace
java.lang.RuntimeException: Couldn't find that class The markup
declarations contained or pointed to by the document type
declaration must be well-formed.
at
net.sourceforge.pmd.RuleSetFactory.parseRuleSetNode(RuleSetFactory.java:235)
at
net.sourceforge.pmd.RuleSetFactory.createRuleSet(RuleSetFactory.java:157)
at
net.sourceforge.pmd.RuleSetFactory.createRuleSet(RuleSetFactory.java:146)
at
org.apache.maven.plugin.pmd.PmdReport.executeReport(PmdReport.java:186)
I would just as soon axe the pmd report from the pom. We can add it
back at a later time if we like.
I am +0 on moving forward with the compatibility breaks documented
in release notes and eliminating the pmd report, but I would like
some feedback before tagging and cutting the RC.
tia,
Phil
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [math] releasing 2.1 - compatibility breaks, site build failure
Posted by Niall Pemberton <ni...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 12:27 AM, Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have completed all of the code / doco changes that I see as
> necessary for 2.1. While preparing an initial RC, I ran into two
> issues, that I want to get consensus on before moving forward.
>
> 1) The clirr report is ugly
> (http://commons.apache.org/math/clirr-report.html)
> I was +1 on all of the breaks, which were all of the form "we got
> the API definitions wrong on 2.0, few users are likely depending on
> these APIs and we are fixing them now." I just want us all to
> review the full set of compatibility breaks and decide that we can
> release trunk as 2.0 (vs. 3.0 or try to retrofit).
>
> 2) I am still getting this nonsense from pmd with the latest
> commons-parent (I am really sorry, Niall, that I did not get a
> chance to test v. 14 prior to release)
The bizarre thing is I did test with math before releasing
commons-parent-14. Intitally I can reproduce this, but then the
problem seems to go away. I'm going to look into this and try to get
to the bottom of it. Sorry about that.
Niall
> [ERROR] FATAL ERROR
> [INFO]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [INFO] Couldn't find that class The markup declarations contained or
> pointed to by the document type declaration must be well-formed.
> [INFO]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [INFO] Trace
> java.lang.RuntimeException: Couldn't find that class The markup
> declarations contained or pointed to by the document type
> declaration must be well-formed.
> at
> net.sourceforge.pmd.RuleSetFactory.parseRuleSetNode(RuleSetFactory.java:235)
> at
> net.sourceforge.pmd.RuleSetFactory.createRuleSet(RuleSetFactory.java:157)
> at
> net.sourceforge.pmd.RuleSetFactory.createRuleSet(RuleSetFactory.java:146)
> at
> org.apache.maven.plugin.pmd.PmdReport.executeReport(PmdReport.java:186)
>
> I would just as soon axe the pmd report from the pom. We can add it
> back at a later time if we like.
>
> I am +0 on moving forward with the compatibility breaks documented
> in release notes and eliminating the pmd report, but I would like
> some feedback before tagging and cutting the RC.
>
> tia,
>
> Phil
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [math] releasing 2.1 - compatibility breaks, site build failure
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
Thanks for the feedback, guys. Sorry for the slow action on this. I
have been sick the past couple of days.
Phil
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [math] releasing 2.1 - compatibility breaks, site build failure
Posted by Bill Barker <bi...@verizon.net>.
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Phil Steitz" <ph...@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2010 5:27 PM
To: "Commons Developers List" <de...@commons.apache.org>
Subject: [math] releasing 2.1 - compatibility breaks, site build failure
> I have completed all of the code / doco changes that I see as
> necessary for 2.1. While preparing an initial RC, I ran into two
> issues, that I want to get consensus on before moving forward.
>
> 1) The clirr report is ugly
> (http://commons.apache.org/math/clirr-report.html)
> I was +1 on all of the breaks, which were all of the form "we got
> the API definitions wrong on 2.0, few users are likely depending on
> these APIs and we are fixing them now." I just want us all to
> review the full set of compatibility breaks and decide that we can
> release trunk as 2.0 (vs. 3.0 or try to retrofit).
>
Yes, the only thing I could suggest is to make the clirr report even uglier
by cleaning up ArrayRealVector to use it's base class methods for map**
methods ;). I don't consider this important enough to hold up a 2.1
release, but if other people do, I'm happy to volunteer to do the work.
I agree with Luc that this should be 2.1. This is mostly bug fixes. I'd
vote to release this as 2.1.
> 2) I am still getting this nonsense from pmd with the latest
> commons-parent (I am really sorry, Niall, that I did not get a
> chance to test v. 14 prior to release)
> [ERROR] FATAL ERROR
> [INFO]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [INFO] Couldn't find that class The markup declarations contained or
> pointed to by the document type declaration must be well-formed.
> [INFO]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [INFO] Trace
> java.lang.RuntimeException: Couldn't find that class The markup
> declarations contained or pointed to by the document type
> declaration must be well-formed.
> at
> net.sourceforge.pmd.RuleSetFactory.parseRuleSetNode(RuleSetFactory.java:235)
> at
> net.sourceforge.pmd.RuleSetFactory.createRuleSet(RuleSetFactory.java:157)
> at
> net.sourceforge.pmd.RuleSetFactory.createRuleSet(RuleSetFactory.java:146)
> at
> org.apache.maven.plugin.pmd.PmdReport.executeReport(PmdReport.java:186)
>
> I would just as soon axe the pmd report from the pom. We can add it
> back at a later time if we like.
>
> I am +0 on moving forward with the compatibility breaks documented
> in release notes and eliminating the pmd report, but I would like
> some feedback before tagging and cutting the RC.
>
> tia,
>
> Phil
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [math] releasing 2.1 - compatibility breaks, site build failure
Posted by Luc Maisonobe <Lu...@free.fr>.
Phil Steitz a écrit :
> I have completed all of the code / doco changes that I see as
> necessary for 2.1. While preparing an initial RC, I ran into two
> issues, that I want to get consensus on before moving forward.
>
> 1) The clirr report is ugly
> (http://commons.apache.org/math/clirr-report.html)
> I was +1 on all of the breaks, which were all of the form "we got
> the API definitions wrong on 2.0, few users are likely depending on
> these APIs and we are fixing them now." I just want us all to
> review the full set of compatibility breaks and decide that we can
> release trunk as 2.0 (vs. 3.0 or try to retrofit).
I have checked the report and agree to release 2.1 with these breaks.
Most of them are really minor ones and the other ones are extremely
unlikely to hurt users. In any case, it is very easy to fix user code if
this happens, and we are ready to help users get it right.
I also consider this version is mainly a bug fix version with a few
extensions, it's not a major change.
+1 for 2.1
Luc
>
> 2) I am still getting this nonsense from pmd with the latest
> commons-parent (I am really sorry, Niall, that I did not get a
> chance to test v. 14 prior to release)
> [ERROR] FATAL ERROR
> [INFO]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [INFO] Couldn't find that class The markup declarations contained or
> pointed to by the document type declaration must be well-formed.
> [INFO]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [INFO] Trace
> java.lang.RuntimeException: Couldn't find that class The markup
> declarations contained or pointed to by the document type
> declaration must be well-formed.
> at
> net.sourceforge.pmd.RuleSetFactory.parseRuleSetNode(RuleSetFactory.java:235)
> at
> net.sourceforge.pmd.RuleSetFactory.createRuleSet(RuleSetFactory.java:157)
> at
> net.sourceforge.pmd.RuleSetFactory.createRuleSet(RuleSetFactory.java:146)
> at
> org.apache.maven.plugin.pmd.PmdReport.executeReport(PmdReport.java:186)
>
> I would just as soon axe the pmd report from the pom. We can add it
> back at a later time if we like.
>
> I am +0 on moving forward with the compatibility breaks documented
> in release notes and eliminating the pmd report, but I would like
> some feedback before tagging and cutting the RC.
>
> tia,
>
> Phil
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org