1.0 Status & Startup/Shutdown Errors

[Aaron Mulder <am...@alumni.princeton.edu>]

It seems like we have 2 problems:

1) Tomcat GBeans starting out of order

2) Something intermittent with daytrader startup.

It seems like #2 appears most often when #1 appears -- I'm not sure if
they're related.  I think David J had some ideas on what was causing
#2, related to missing build dependencies or bad startup dependencies
or something.

I think we should look into these in detail and fix them on the 1.0
branch.  I don't really like the process of manually unpacking a RC,
running it, repacking it, especially since people are still getting
the errors after that.

If we have some sort of problem with dependencies and GBean ordering,
that might explain all the ActiveMQ barfing we've started to see
during shutdown (e.g. if we stop ActiveMQ before daytrader so
daytrader is still making calls, or something?).  Though, I'm not sure
if that's a new problem or if it just didn't manifest until we started
deploying an application that uses ActiveMQ more extensively.

Anyway, if there's a feeling that we need to have a release right
away, let's just label it 1.0-rc1 and let that go for a couple weeks
while we wrap up the loose ends.

Unfortunately, I'm in the land of no internet access until Saturday
night, so I probably won't be able to do much until Sunday.

Thanks,
    Aaron

Re: 1.0 Status & Startup/Shutdown Errors

[Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org>]

My opinion is we fix the problems and release a usable version.  No sense 
rushing it to get bad press and cause a bad first impression.

+1 fixing the 1.0 branch.

Aaron Mulder wrote:
> It seems like we have 2 problems:
> 
> 1) Tomcat GBeans starting out of order
> 
> 2) Something intermittent with daytrader startup.
> 
> It seems like #2 appears most often when #1 appears -- I'm not sure if
> they're related.  I think David J had some ideas on what was causing
> #2, related to missing build dependencies or bad startup dependencies
> or something.
> 
> I think we should look into these in detail and fix them on the 1.0
> branch.  I don't really like the process of manually unpacking a RC,
> running it, repacking it, especially since people are still getting
> the errors after that.
> 
> If we have some sort of problem with dependencies and GBean ordering,
> that might explain all the ActiveMQ barfing we've started to see
> during shutdown (e.g. if we stop ActiveMQ before daytrader so
> daytrader is still making calls, or something?).  Though, I'm not sure
> if that's a new problem or if it just didn't manifest until we started
> deploying an application that uses ActiveMQ more extensively.
> 
> Anyway, if there's a feeling that we need to have a release right
> away, let's just label it 1.0-rc1 and let that go for a couple weeks
> while we wrap up the loose ends.
> 
> Unfortunately, I'm in the land of no internet access until Saturday
> night, so I probably won't be able to do much until Sunday.
> 
> Thanks,
>     Aaron
> 
> 
> 

Re: 1.0 Status & Startup/Shutdown Errors

[Jeff Genender <jg...@apache.org>]

+1...this is a good idea.

Aaron Mulder wrote:
> It seems like we have 2 problems:
> 
> 1) Tomcat GBeans starting out of order
> 
> 2) Something intermittent with daytrader startup.
> 
> It seems like #2 appears most often when #1 appears -- I'm not sure if
> they're related.  I think David J had some ideas on what was causing
> #2, related to missing build dependencies or bad startup dependencies
> or something.
> 
> I think we should look into these in detail and fix them on the 1.0
> branch.  I don't really like the process of manually unpacking a RC,
> running it, repacking it, especially since people are still getting
> the errors after that.
> 
> If we have some sort of problem with dependencies and GBean ordering,
> that might explain all the ActiveMQ barfing we've started to see
> during shutdown (e.g. if we stop ActiveMQ before daytrader so
> daytrader is still making calls, or something?).  Though, I'm not sure
> if that's a new problem or if it just didn't manifest until we started
> deploying an application that uses ActiveMQ more extensively.
> 
> Anyway, if there's a feeling that we need to have a release right
> away, let's just label it 1.0-rc1 and let that go for a couple weeks
> while we wrap up the loose ends.
> 
> Unfortunately, I'm in the land of no internet access until Saturday
> night, so I probably won't be able to do much until Sunday.
> 
> Thanks,
>     Aaron