You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@commons.apache.org by Henning Schmiedehausen <he...@schmiedehausen.org> on 2013/10/22 12:10:47 UTC
[VOTE] Release configuration-1.10 based on RC1
[haven't done that in a long time. Please bear with me...]
Bug fixes and minor enhancements from configuration 1.9.
So I would like to release configuration 1.10.
Configuration 1.10 RC1 is available for review here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/configuration/ (svn revision
3321)
Maven artifacts are here:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-019/commons-configuration/commons-configuration/1.10-RC1/
Details of changes since 1.9 are in the release notes:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/configuration/RELEASE-NOTES-1.10-RC1.txt
Changes file:
http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/changes-report.html
Site: http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/ (The JIRA
report will be fixed for the release)
The tag is here:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/proper/configuration/tags/CONFIGURATION_1_10RC1/(svn
revision 1534569)
Clirr Report (compared to 1.9):
http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/clirr-report.html
RAT Report:
http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/rat-report.html
KEYS: http://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
Please review the release candidate and vote.
This vote will close no sooner that 72 hours from now, i.e. after 1100 GMT
25-Oct 2013
[ ] +1 Release these artifacts
[ ] +0 OK, but...
[ ] -0 OK, but really should fix...
[ ] -1 I oppose this release because...
Thanks!
Re: [VOTE] Release configuration-1.10 based on RC1
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 4:13 PM, Oliver Heger
<ol...@oliver-heger.de>wrote:
> Am 22.10.2013 18:48, schrieb Gary Gregory:
> > Hen: Welcome back to the release mud pit! ;)
> >
> > I am looking at your site and I also checked out the tag and built it.
> >
> > -1
> >
> > The site, at the top says "Version 1.10-RC1", it should say "Version:
> 1.10".
> >
> > This is because the POM still says 1.10-RC1 instead of 1.10.
> >
> > This would also explain this:
> >
> > [WARNING] Downloading from JIRA failed. Received: [400]
> > [WARNING] JIRA file
> > C:\temp\rc\CONFIGURATION_1_10RC1\target\jira-results.xml doesn't exist.
> > [WARNING]
> > org.apache.maven.plugin.MojoExecutionException: Couldn't find any issues
> > for the version '1.10-RC1' among the supplied issues: []
> >
> > The logo is missing its "TM" per Apache branding.
> >
> > When I run "mvn site" I get a unit test error but the build does not
> fail,
> > which I do not understand:
> >
> > Running org.apache.commons.configuration.TestDataConfiguration
> > Tests run: 50, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.002
> sec
> > <<< FAILURE! - in org.apache.commons.configuration.TestDataConfiguration
> >
> testGetInetAddressInvalidType(org.apache.commons.configuration.TestDataConfiguration)
> > Time elapsed: 0 sec <<< FAILURE!
> > java.lang.AssertionError: Expected exception:
> > org.apache.commons.configuration.ConversionException
> > at
> >
> org.junit.internal.runners.statements.ExpectException.evaluate(ExpectException.java:32)
> > at
> >
> org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunBefores.evaluate(RunBefores.java:26)
> > at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runLeaf(ParentRunner.java:271)
> > at
> >
> org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:70)
> > at
> >
> org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:50)
> > at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.run(ParentRunner.java:238)
> > at
> org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.schedule(ParentRunner.java:63)
> > at
> org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:236)
> > at
> org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$000(ParentRunner.java:53)
> > at
> org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$2.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:229)
> > at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.run(ParentRunner.java:309)
> > at
> >
> org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.execute(JUnit4Provider.java:264)
> > at
> >
> org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.executeTestSet(JUnit4Provider.java:153)
> > at
> >
> org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.invoke(JUnit4Provider.java:124)
> > at
> >
> org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.invokeProviderInSameClassLoader(ForkedBooter.java:200)
> > at
> >
> org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.runSuitesInProcess(ForkedBooter.java:153)
> > at
> > org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.main(ForkedBooter.java:103)
> >
> > RAT and Clirr reports are clean.
> >
> > Cobertura reports the following have 0% test code coverage:
> >
> > - AppletConfiguration
> > - HierarchicalXMLConfiguration
> > - TokenMgrError
>
> HierarchicalXMLConfiguration is an empty deprecated class (it was
> renamed long ago to XMLConfiguration and exists only for backwards
> compatibility).
> TokenMgrError is generated using JavaCC.
> For AppletConfiguration a test class exists. However, the test checks
> whether an applet can be created. If not, no tests are executed. So
> maybe the test was run in an environment which does not support applets?
>
Well, I ran the build from the command line with Maven. I think someone
pointed out that the problem is with bad domain resolution. My ISP, Cox,
has the habit of turning bad domain requests into "search results", not
cool.
Gary
>
> Oliver
>
> >
> > This might not be a blocker but it does not inspire confidence.
> >
> > Other reports look good.
> >
> > My setup:
> >
> > Apache Maven 3.1.1 (0728685237757ffbf44136acec0402957f723d9a; 2013-09-17
> > 11:22:22-0400)
> > Maven home: C:\Java\apache-maven-3.1.1\bin\..
> > Java version: 1.7.0_45, vendor: Oracle Corporation
> > Java home: C:\Program Files\Java\jdk1.7.0_45\jre
> > Default locale: en_US, platform encoding: Cp1252
> > OS name: "windows 7", version: "6.1", arch: "amd64", family: "windows"
> >
> > Gary
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 6:10 AM, Henning Schmiedehausen <
> > henning@schmiedehausen.org> wrote:
> >
> >> [haven't done that in a long time. Please bear with me...]
> >>
> >> Bug fixes and minor enhancements from configuration 1.9.
> >>
> >> So I would like to release configuration 1.10.
> >>
> >> Configuration 1.10 RC1 is available for review here:
> >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/configuration/ (svn
> >> revision
> >> 3321)
> >>
> >> Maven artifacts are here:
> >>
> >>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-019/commons-configuration/commons-configuration/1.10-RC1/
> >>
> >> Details of changes since 1.9 are in the release notes:
> >>
> >>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/configuration/RELEASE-NOTES-1.10-RC1.txt
> >> Changes file:
> >>
> >>
> http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/changes-report.html
> >>
> >> Site: http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/ (The
> JIRA
> >> report will be fixed for the release)
> >>
> >> The tag is here:
> >>
> >>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/proper/configuration/tags/CONFIGURATION_1_10RC1/(svn
> >> revision 1534569)
> >>
> >> Clirr Report (compared to 1.9):
> >>
> http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/clirr-report.html
> >> RAT Report:
> >>
> http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/rat-report.html
> >>
> >> KEYS: http://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
> >>
> >> Please review the release candidate and vote.
> >>
> >> This vote will close no sooner that 72 hours from now, i.e. after 1100
> GMT
> >> 25-Oct 2013
> >>
> >> [ ] +1 Release these artifacts
> >> [ ] +0 OK, but...
> >> [ ] -0 OK, but really should fix...
> >> [ ] -1 I oppose this release because...
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks!
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
--
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
Re: [VOTE] Release configuration-1.10 based on RC1
Posted by Oliver Heger <ol...@oliver-heger.de>.
Am 22.10.2013 18:48, schrieb Gary Gregory:
> Hen: Welcome back to the release mud pit! ;)
>
> I am looking at your site and I also checked out the tag and built it.
>
> -1
>
> The site, at the top says "Version 1.10-RC1", it should say "Version: 1.10".
>
> This is because the POM still says 1.10-RC1 instead of 1.10.
>
> This would also explain this:
>
> [WARNING] Downloading from JIRA failed. Received: [400]
> [WARNING] JIRA file
> C:\temp\rc\CONFIGURATION_1_10RC1\target\jira-results.xml doesn't exist.
> [WARNING]
> org.apache.maven.plugin.MojoExecutionException: Couldn't find any issues
> for the version '1.10-RC1' among the supplied issues: []
>
> The logo is missing its "TM" per Apache branding.
>
> When I run "mvn site" I get a unit test error but the build does not fail,
> which I do not understand:
>
> Running org.apache.commons.configuration.TestDataConfiguration
> Tests run: 50, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.002 sec
> <<< FAILURE! - in org.apache.commons.configuration.TestDataConfiguration
> testGetInetAddressInvalidType(org.apache.commons.configuration.TestDataConfiguration)
> Time elapsed: 0 sec <<< FAILURE!
> java.lang.AssertionError: Expected exception:
> org.apache.commons.configuration.ConversionException
> at
> org.junit.internal.runners.statements.ExpectException.evaluate(ExpectException.java:32)
> at
> org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunBefores.evaluate(RunBefores.java:26)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runLeaf(ParentRunner.java:271)
> at
> org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:70)
> at
> org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:50)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.run(ParentRunner.java:238)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.schedule(ParentRunner.java:63)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:236)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$000(ParentRunner.java:53)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$2.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:229)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.run(ParentRunner.java:309)
> at
> org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.execute(JUnit4Provider.java:264)
> at
> org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.executeTestSet(JUnit4Provider.java:153)
> at
> org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.invoke(JUnit4Provider.java:124)
> at
> org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.invokeProviderInSameClassLoader(ForkedBooter.java:200)
> at
> org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.runSuitesInProcess(ForkedBooter.java:153)
> at
> org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.main(ForkedBooter.java:103)
>
> RAT and Clirr reports are clean.
>
> Cobertura reports the following have 0% test code coverage:
>
> - AppletConfiguration
> - HierarchicalXMLConfiguration
> - TokenMgrError
HierarchicalXMLConfiguration is an empty deprecated class (it was
renamed long ago to XMLConfiguration and exists only for backwards
compatibility).
TokenMgrError is generated using JavaCC.
For AppletConfiguration a test class exists. However, the test checks
whether an applet can be created. If not, no tests are executed. So
maybe the test was run in an environment which does not support applets?
Oliver
>
> This might not be a blocker but it does not inspire confidence.
>
> Other reports look good.
>
> My setup:
>
> Apache Maven 3.1.1 (0728685237757ffbf44136acec0402957f723d9a; 2013-09-17
> 11:22:22-0400)
> Maven home: C:\Java\apache-maven-3.1.1\bin\..
> Java version: 1.7.0_45, vendor: Oracle Corporation
> Java home: C:\Program Files\Java\jdk1.7.0_45\jre
> Default locale: en_US, platform encoding: Cp1252
> OS name: "windows 7", version: "6.1", arch: "amd64", family: "windows"
>
> Gary
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 6:10 AM, Henning Schmiedehausen <
> henning@schmiedehausen.org> wrote:
>
>> [haven't done that in a long time. Please bear with me...]
>>
>> Bug fixes and minor enhancements from configuration 1.9.
>>
>> So I would like to release configuration 1.10.
>>
>> Configuration 1.10 RC1 is available for review here:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/configuration/ (svn
>> revision
>> 3321)
>>
>> Maven artifacts are here:
>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-019/commons-configuration/commons-configuration/1.10-RC1/
>>
>> Details of changes since 1.9 are in the release notes:
>>
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/configuration/RELEASE-NOTES-1.10-RC1.txt
>> Changes file:
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/changes-report.html
>>
>> Site: http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/ (The JIRA
>> report will be fixed for the release)
>>
>> The tag is here:
>>
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/proper/configuration/tags/CONFIGURATION_1_10RC1/(svn
>> revision 1534569)
>>
>> Clirr Report (compared to 1.9):
>> http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/clirr-report.html
>> RAT Report:
>> http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/rat-report.html
>>
>> KEYS: http://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
>>
>> Please review the release candidate and vote.
>>
>> This vote will close no sooner that 72 hours from now, i.e. after 1100 GMT
>> 25-Oct 2013
>>
>> [ ] +1 Release these artifacts
>> [ ] +0 OK, but...
>> [ ] -0 OK, but really should fix...
>> [ ] -1 I oppose this release because...
>>
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release configuration-1.10 based on RC1
Posted by Henning Schmiedehausen <he...@schmiedehausen.org>.
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 6:17 AM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Committed revision 1535372.
Thanks, that is awesome. I will put it on the maintenance branch and
if the release passes, patch the site with the new image. I don't
think that warrants an RC3 (because the actually released bits will be
unchanged). The site is not part of the release IMHO.
-h
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release configuration-1.10 based on RC1
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 9:48 AM, Emmanuel Bourg <eb...@apache.org> wrote:
> Le 24/10/2013 15:17, Gary Gregory a écrit :
>
> > Committed revision 1535372.
>
> Isn't the trademark on "Apache Commons Configuration" and not just
> "Commons Configuration" ?
Stric
> If we don't use "Apache" of the feather in the
> logo I'm not sure it qualifies for a "TM" symbol.
>
The approach we have been taking with all Commons logos is to add a "TM" to
each "Commons Foo" logos. I do not think any of our logos say "Apache
Commons Foo", they could of course. In the future, it would be best to use
"Apache Commons Foo" IMO.
>From the page (my bold):
"Logos are important to recognize as trademarks as well. For the project's
official logo (if it has one, and especially if it uses the ASF
feather), *ensure
that it includes a small "TM" symbol* in the graphic or immediately
adjacent to it. For pages that include the project logo on them, ensure you
mention "... and the Project logo are trademarks..." in the attribution.
*Projects may may choose to use the Apache feather in their logo if they
wish*, but if they do so they should contact trademarks@ to determine the
best format of the feather to use. In the near future we plan to have much
simpler versions of the feather to incorporate if desired, including
various sizes and colors."
Gary
>
> Emmanuel Bourg
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
--
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
Re: [VOTE] Release configuration-1.10 based on RC1
Posted by Emmanuel Bourg <eb...@apache.org>.
Le 24/10/2013 15:17, Gary Gregory a écrit :
> Committed revision 1535372.
Isn't the trademark on "Apache Commons Configuration" and not just
"Commons Configuration" ? If we don't use "Apache" of the feather in the
logo I'm not sure it qualifies for a "TM" symbol.
Emmanuel Bourg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release configuration-1.10 based on RC1
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Henning Schmiedehausen <
henning@schmiedehausen.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 9:48 AM, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > The logo is missing its "TM" per Apache branding.
> >
> [...]
>
> Oh, I thought that you meant the "Apache Commons" logo, so I was confused.
> You seriously suggest that I change the PNG for "commons configuration"?
>
I think we should _all_ follow the "Apache Project Branding Requirements"
listed this page: https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs.html.
In this case, specifically
https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs.html#graphics
Feel free to send me patched files. :-)
>
Committed revision 1535372.
Gary
--
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
Re: [VOTE] Release configuration-1.10 based on RC1
Posted by Henning Schmiedehausen <he...@schmiedehausen.org>.
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 9:48 AM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>wrote:
[...]
> The logo is missing its "TM" per Apache branding.
>
[...]
Oh, I thought that you meant the "Apache Commons" logo, so I was confused.
You seriously suggest that I change the PNG for "commons configuration"?
Feel free to send me patched files. :-)
Re: [VOTE] Release configuration-1.10 based on RC1
Posted by Henning Schmiedehausen <he...@schmiedehausen.org>.
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 11:33 PM, Henning Schmiedehausen <
henning@schmiedehausen.org> wrote:
> When I run "mvn site" I get a unit test error but the build does not fail,
>> which I do not understand:
>>
>> Running org.apache.commons.configuration.TestDataConfiguration
>> Tests run: 50, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.002 sec
>> <<< FAILURE! - in org.apache.commons.configuration.TestDataConfiguration
>>
>> testGetInetAddressInvalidType(org.apache.commons.configuration.TestDataConfiguration)
>> Time elapsed: 0 sec <<< FAILURE!
>> java.lang.AssertionError: Expected exception:
>> org.apache.commons.configuration.ConversionException
>>
>
That turned out to be trivial. I bet that "host foo" (or the windows
equivalent) in your network returns something.
e.g.
% host foo
foo.dyn.intermeta.com has address 192.168.2.234
that causes the build to fail for me. Which is horrible but that's what the
tests are. :-)
I have a fix for that.
-h
Re: [VOTE] Release configuration-1.10 based on RC1
Posted by Henning Schmiedehausen <he...@schmiedehausen.org>.
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 9:48 AM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hen: Welcome back to the release mud pit! ;)
>
Thank you Gar, I am glad to be here again.
I am looking at your site and I also checked out the tag and built it.
>
> -1
>
> The site, at the top says "Version 1.10-RC1", it should say "Version:
> 1.10".
>
It is an RC. So the artifacts and everything have RC1 in it. I can build
those with the final version, that is no big deal. But that opens the door
to having multiple artifacts with the same version floating around (and
would be a highly unusual way to do a release but at the end of the day I
don't really care). If you feel that this is a show stopper that makes you
vote a release down, then so be it.
>
> This is because the POM still says 1.10-RC1 instead of 1.10.
>
That's because I told it to say so. :-)
>
> This would also explain this:
>
> [WARNING] Downloading from JIRA failed. Received: [400]
> [WARNING] JIRA file
> C:\temp\rc\CONFIGURATION_1_10RC1\target\jira-results.xml doesn't exist.
> [WARNING]
> org.apache.maven.plugin.MojoExecutionException: Couldn't find any issues
> for the version '1.10-RC1' among the supplied issues: []
>
> The logo is missing its "TM" per Apache branding.
>
Well, as I did not touch anything in the site build, I assume that the 1.9
release tag builds a site that looks the same and someone patched the
released site. As I am not a psychic, how should I know that? I assume that
somewhere in the site files, a PNG needs to change. I wish I had time to
chase all these things down.
> When I run "mvn site" I get a unit test error but the build does not fail,
> which I do not understand:
>
> Running org.apache.commons.configuration.TestDataConfiguration
> Tests run: 50, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.002 sec
> <<< FAILURE! - in org.apache.commons.configuration.TestDataConfiguration
>
> testGetInetAddressInvalidType(org.apache.commons.configuration.TestDataConfiguration)
> Time elapsed: 0 sec <<< FAILURE!
> java.lang.AssertionError: Expected exception:
> org.apache.commons.configuration.ConversionException
> at
>
> org.junit.internal.runners.statements.ExpectException.evaluate(ExpectException.java:32)
> at
>
> org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunBefores.evaluate(RunBefores.java:26)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runLeaf(ParentRunner.java:271)
> at
>
> org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:70)
> at
>
> org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:50)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.run(ParentRunner.java:238)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.schedule(ParentRunner.java:63)
> at
> org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:236)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$000(ParentRunner.java:53)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$2.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:229)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.run(ParentRunner.java:309)
> at
>
> org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.execute(JUnit4Provider.java:264)
> at
>
> org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.executeTestSet(JUnit4Provider.java:153)
> at
>
> org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.invoke(JUnit4Provider.java:124)
> at
>
> org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.invokeProviderInSameClassLoader(ForkedBooter.java:200)
> at
>
> org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.runSuitesInProcess(ForkedBooter.java:153)
> at
> org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.main(ForkedBooter.java:103)
>
I have no idea. I built on Linux and Mac with JDK6 and JDK7 and it works
fine. It might be that building on Windows is broken. Please verify with
the 1.9 release tag (or trunk) and file a bug. I do not consider that a
showstopper, though and I also do not have the means to chase that problem
down.
If you can fix it, we can add a patch before doing the release.
> RAT and Clirr reports are clean.
>
> Cobertura reports the following have 0% test code coverage:
>
> - AppletConfiguration
> - HierarchicalXMLConfiguration
> - TokenMgrError
>
Since when is that a criteria for a release? I guess there never were any
tests for these in previous releases. At least the current site does not.
>
> This might not be a blocker but it does not inspire confidence.
>
My understanding of an Apache software release is that the bits shipped
need to adhere to the terms of the Apache license. Not that the code needs
to be good. If that were the case, I could name a dozen Apache projects
that would never ever be allowed to do a release. :-)
> Other reports look good.
>
> My setup:
>
> Apache Maven 3.1.1 (0728685237757ffbf44136acec0402957f723d9a; 2013-09-17
> 11:22:22-0400)
>
That is a bad idea. You should try 3.0.5. Maven 3.1.x is bad news all
around so far. There are tons of plugins that behave unpredictable and
sometimes outright wrong. Someone would need to spend quality time with the
pom, the plugin versions and the "compatibility matrix" (which is
incomplete and partially wrong) to ensure that the build works with maven
3.1.x. Does 3.1.x actually work with the JDK6?
> Maven home: C:\Java\apache-maven-3.1.1\bin\..
> Java version: 1.7.0_45, vendor: Oracle Corporation
> Java home: C:\Program Files\Java\jdk1.7.0_45\jre
>
You should try JDK6.
> Default locale: en_US, platform encoding: Cp1252
> OS name: "windows 7", version: "6.1", arch: "amd64", family: "windows"
>
I am sorry that I know nothing about Java on Windows.
Thanks for testing out the release! I am still a bit surprised that you
think I should build an actual 1.10 release from the release tag (in every
project that I ever worked on, the policy was that for a.b-RC<x>, one
builds artifacts that match this version and if the release passes, you
build a final a.b). But if the consensus is that from the a.b-RC<x> tag,
there should be an "a.b" artifact built, I am totally happy to do so. After
all, these are only bits.
Quality, as ludicrous as that sounds, is IMHO not a stopper for a release.
Same goes for the site IMHO. The site code is unchanged from the 1.9
release; if Apache policy has changed and there need to be changes put into
the site, I hope someone will either step up or point me at the necessary
changes any patch is appreciated. I wish I could spend significant time
chasing down what needs to be changed, but my window of opportunity to do
this release is slowly closing.
Thanks,
Henning
> Gary
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 6:10 AM, Henning Schmiedehausen <
> henning@schmiedehausen.org> wrote:
>
> > [haven't done that in a long time. Please bear with me...]
> >
> > Bug fixes and minor enhancements from configuration 1.9.
> >
> > So I would like to release configuration 1.10.
> >
> > Configuration 1.10 RC1 is available for review here:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/configuration/ (svn
> > revision
> > 3321)
> >
> > Maven artifacts are here:
> >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-019/commons-configuration/commons-configuration/1.10-RC1/
> >
> > Details of changes since 1.9 are in the release notes:
> >
> >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/configuration/RELEASE-NOTES-1.10-RC1.txt
> > Changes file:
> >
> >
> http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/changes-report.html
> >
> > Site: http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/ (The
> JIRA
> > report will be fixed for the release)
> >
> > The tag is here:
> >
> >
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/proper/configuration/tags/CONFIGURATION_1_10RC1/(svn
> > revision 1534569)
> >
> > Clirr Report (compared to 1.9):
> >
> http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/clirr-report.html
> > RAT Report:
> > http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/rat-report.html
> >
> > KEYS: http://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
> >
> > Please review the release candidate and vote.
> >
> > This vote will close no sooner that 72 hours from now, i.e. after 1100
> GMT
> > 25-Oct 2013
> >
> > [ ] +1 Release these artifacts
> > [ ] +0 OK, but...
> > [ ] -0 OK, but really should fix...
> > [ ] -1 I oppose this release because...
> >
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
>
>
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition<
> http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>
Re: [VOTE] Release configuration-1.10 based on RC1
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
Hen: Welcome back to the release mud pit! ;)
I am looking at your site and I also checked out the tag and built it.
-1
The site, at the top says "Version 1.10-RC1", it should say "Version: 1.10".
This is because the POM still says 1.10-RC1 instead of 1.10.
This would also explain this:
[WARNING] Downloading from JIRA failed. Received: [400]
[WARNING] JIRA file
C:\temp\rc\CONFIGURATION_1_10RC1\target\jira-results.xml doesn't exist.
[WARNING]
org.apache.maven.plugin.MojoExecutionException: Couldn't find any issues
for the version '1.10-RC1' among the supplied issues: []
The logo is missing its "TM" per Apache branding.
When I run "mvn site" I get a unit test error but the build does not fail,
which I do not understand:
Running org.apache.commons.configuration.TestDataConfiguration
Tests run: 50, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.002 sec
<<< FAILURE! - in org.apache.commons.configuration.TestDataConfiguration
testGetInetAddressInvalidType(org.apache.commons.configuration.TestDataConfiguration)
Time elapsed: 0 sec <<< FAILURE!
java.lang.AssertionError: Expected exception:
org.apache.commons.configuration.ConversionException
at
org.junit.internal.runners.statements.ExpectException.evaluate(ExpectException.java:32)
at
org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunBefores.evaluate(RunBefores.java:26)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runLeaf(ParentRunner.java:271)
at
org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:70)
at
org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:50)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.run(ParentRunner.java:238)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.schedule(ParentRunner.java:63)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:236)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$000(ParentRunner.java:53)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$2.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:229)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.run(ParentRunner.java:309)
at
org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.execute(JUnit4Provider.java:264)
at
org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.executeTestSet(JUnit4Provider.java:153)
at
org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.invoke(JUnit4Provider.java:124)
at
org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.invokeProviderInSameClassLoader(ForkedBooter.java:200)
at
org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.runSuitesInProcess(ForkedBooter.java:153)
at
org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.main(ForkedBooter.java:103)
RAT and Clirr reports are clean.
Cobertura reports the following have 0% test code coverage:
- AppletConfiguration
- HierarchicalXMLConfiguration
- TokenMgrError
This might not be a blocker but it does not inspire confidence.
Other reports look good.
My setup:
Apache Maven 3.1.1 (0728685237757ffbf44136acec0402957f723d9a; 2013-09-17
11:22:22-0400)
Maven home: C:\Java\apache-maven-3.1.1\bin\..
Java version: 1.7.0_45, vendor: Oracle Corporation
Java home: C:\Program Files\Java\jdk1.7.0_45\jre
Default locale: en_US, platform encoding: Cp1252
OS name: "windows 7", version: "6.1", arch: "amd64", family: "windows"
Gary
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 6:10 AM, Henning Schmiedehausen <
henning@schmiedehausen.org> wrote:
> [haven't done that in a long time. Please bear with me...]
>
> Bug fixes and minor enhancements from configuration 1.9.
>
> So I would like to release configuration 1.10.
>
> Configuration 1.10 RC1 is available for review here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/configuration/ (svn
> revision
> 3321)
>
> Maven artifacts are here:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-019/commons-configuration/commons-configuration/1.10-RC1/
>
> Details of changes since 1.9 are in the release notes:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/configuration/RELEASE-NOTES-1.10-RC1.txt
> Changes file:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/changes-report.html
>
> Site: http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/ (The JIRA
> report will be fixed for the release)
>
> The tag is here:
>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/proper/configuration/tags/CONFIGURATION_1_10RC1/(svn
> revision 1534569)
>
> Clirr Report (compared to 1.9):
> http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/clirr-report.html
> RAT Report:
> http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/rat-report.html
>
> KEYS: http://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
>
> Please review the release candidate and vote.
>
> This vote will close no sooner that 72 hours from now, i.e. after 1100 GMT
> 25-Oct 2013
>
> [ ] +1 Release these artifacts
> [ ] +0 OK, but...
> [ ] -0 OK, but really should fix...
> [ ] -1 I oppose this release because...
>
>
> Thanks!
>
--
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
Re: [VOTE] Release configuration-1.10 based on RC1
Posted by Henning Schmiedehausen <he...@schmiedehausen.org>.
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 11:26 AM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 22 October 2013 11:10, Henning Schmiedehausen
> <he...@schmiedehausen.org> wrote:
> > [haven't done that in a long time. Please bear with me...]
> >
> > Bug fixes and minor enhancements from configuration 1.9.
> >
> > So I would like to release configuration 1.10.
> >
> > Configuration 1.10 RC1 is available for review here:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/configuration/ (svn
> revision
> > 3321)
> >
> > Maven artifacts are here:
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-019/commons-configuration/commons-configuration/1.10-RC1/
> >
> > Details of changes since 1.9 are in the release notes:
> >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/configuration/RELEASE-NOTES-1.10-RC1.txt
> > Changes file:
> >
> http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/changes-report.html
> >
> > Site: http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/ (The
> JIRA
> > report will be fixed for the release)
> >
> > The tag is here:
> >
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/proper/configuration/tags/CONFIGURATION_1_10RC1/(svn
> > revision 1534569)
> >
> > Clirr Report (compared to 1.9):
> >
> http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/clirr-report.html
> > RAT Report:
> > http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/rat-report.html
> >
> > KEYS: http://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
> >
> > Please review the release candidate and vote.
> >
> > This vote will close no sooner that 72 hours from now, i.e. after 1100
> GMT
> > 25-Oct 2013
> >
> > [ ] +1 Release these artifacts
> > [ ] +0 OK, but...
> > [ ] -0 OK, but really should fix...
> > [X] -1 I oppose this release because...
>
> The release artifacts and jar files should not have RC1 in them.
>
Yes, Gary said the same thing. I am still surprised that consensus is that
we should build artifacts with the final version from the RC. But that is
easily done.
>
> The NOTICE file is wrong, it should be "developed at" not "developed by"
>
Well, it was changed only on trunk. I can fix this.
>
> Some SVN files are missing from the source release:
>
> build.properties.sample
> build.xml
>
Yes. I doubt that the ant build still works. I will kill them from the repo.
>
> The above should either be removed from SVN or included in the source
> release.
>
> The following are missing, but that is not a problem:
> doap_configuration.rdf
> PROPOSAL.html
>
Proposal is the 10 year old "let's move that out of Turbine into commons".
Whee, I was already around when that was created. :-) The doap file is an
internal file and should not be in the release.
>
> Otherwise, the RC looks OK - it builds and tests OK with Java 1.5
>
> I did not check the site build.
>
> >
> > Thanks!
>
Thanks for looking at the build,
Henning
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release configuration-1.10 based on RC1
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 22 October 2013 11:10, Henning Schmiedehausen
<he...@schmiedehausen.org> wrote:
> [haven't done that in a long time. Please bear with me...]
>
> Bug fixes and minor enhancements from configuration 1.9.
>
> So I would like to release configuration 1.10.
>
> Configuration 1.10 RC1 is available for review here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/configuration/ (svn revision
> 3321)
>
> Maven artifacts are here:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-019/commons-configuration/commons-configuration/1.10-RC1/
>
> Details of changes since 1.9 are in the release notes:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/configuration/RELEASE-NOTES-1.10-RC1.txt
> Changes file:
> http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/changes-report.html
>
> Site: http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/ (The JIRA
> report will be fixed for the release)
>
> The tag is here:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/proper/configuration/tags/CONFIGURATION_1_10RC1/(svn
> revision 1534569)
>
> Clirr Report (compared to 1.9):
> http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/clirr-report.html
> RAT Report:
> http://people.apache.org/~henning/configuration-1.10-RC1/rat-report.html
>
> KEYS: http://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
>
> Please review the release candidate and vote.
>
> This vote will close no sooner that 72 hours from now, i.e. after 1100 GMT
> 25-Oct 2013
>
> [ ] +1 Release these artifacts
> [ ] +0 OK, but...
> [ ] -0 OK, but really should fix...
> [X] -1 I oppose this release because...
The release artifacts and jar files should not have RC1 in them.
The NOTICE file is wrong, it should be "developed at" not "developed by"
Some SVN files are missing from the source release:
build.properties.sample
build.xml
The above should either be removed from SVN or included in the source release.
The following are missing, but that is not a problem:
doap_configuration.rdf
PROPOSAL.html
Otherwise, the RC looks OK - it builds and tests OK with Java 1.5
I did not check the site build.
>
> Thanks!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org