You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to j-users@xalan.apache.org by Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org> on 2023/03/25 15:31:39 UTC
[request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Hi all,
I've published the new RC for XalanJ 2.7.3 release (located at
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/xalan/j/2.7.3/RC10/). This RC,
uses Apache Commons BCEL 6.7.0, and also provides means to build and
test XalanJ from the source distribution.
Since the previous XalanJ RC, this RC provides following improvements,
1) Few improvements to the XalanJ implementation and tests build
scripts, based on feedback from XalanJ list members.
2) New linux build scripts, for XalanJ implementation and tests builds.
3) Implementation of few new XalanJ tests, for the jira issues solved
for XalanJ 2.7.3.
4) Upgrade to the latest jtidy library (that parses XalanJ tests
output HTML documents).
5) Suppression of few error messages, during XalanJ tests build, whose
context was not clear.
The apache git tags corresponding to this RC, are following (these
have been committed as well),
xalan-java repos (branch xalan-j_2_7_1_maint) : xalan-j_2_7_3-rc10
xalan-test repos (branch master) : xalan-j_2_7_3-rc10
I've verified the working of this RC, both on windows and linux
platforms, and necessary build tests pass as discussed during review
of XalanJ RC9.
The key that can be used, to verify this RC is located within the
file, at https://dlcdn.apache.org/xalan/xalan-j/KEYS.
The XalanJ readme file, has been updated here
https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=xalan-java.git;a=blob_plain;f=README;hb=refs/heads/xalan-j_2_7_1_maint,
describing the XalanJ build and tests process.
Kindly review and vote, for this XalanJ 2.7.3 RC.
Great work everyone. Here's my +1 for this RC.
--
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Joseph Kessselman <ke...@alum.mit.edu>.
Ah. I did see that and had not investigated.
Different configuration for dev build and src build seemed surprising,
but if that's what we've got, it's working, and the docs are clear
there's no need to change it. (And if it's standard practice for Apache,
it would be hard to argue with.)
On 3/26/2023 11:11 AM, Mukul Gandhi wrote:
> Hi Joseph,
>
> On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 8:18 PM cc Kesselman <ke...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>> I've certainly been running the tests with xalan-java and xalan-test as siblings checked out into the same parent directory, and I believe that is what the build now assumes. It also makes more sense when working with these in Eclipse, which expects projects to be siblings.
> A XalanJ developer, is expected to check-out the xalan-java and
> xalan-test repos's as siblings. That's how XalanJ, builds are
> organized for the developer.
>
> For a XalanJ src distribution user, we provide the XalanJ distribution
> files xalan-j_2_7_3-src.zip/xalan-j_2_7_3-src.tar.gz.
>
> We originally agreed that, the XalanJ src distribution user, would get
> the entire contents of folder xalan-test within the src.zip/tar.gz.
> files. The XalanJ src distribution builds (for the implementation and
> the tests) are organized around this folder structure relationship.
>
> Firstly, the XalanJ user has to be within the src distribution root
> (after user does the unzip of the XalanJ src distribution), and run
> the command 'build clean fulldist' to produce the XalanJ build which
> the user might want to test with XalanJ test suite. Then the XalanJ
> user needs to go within the xalan-test folder (within the XalanJ src
> distribution folder structure), and can run XalanJ tests from there,
> as described within the XalanJ README file.
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@xalan.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@xalan.apache.org
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org>.
Hi Joseph,
On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 8:18 PM cc Kesselman <ke...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>
> I've certainly been running the tests with xalan-java and xalan-test as siblings checked out into the same parent directory, and I believe that is what the build now assumes. It also makes more sense when working with these in Eclipse, which expects projects to be siblings.
A XalanJ developer, is expected to check-out the xalan-java and
xalan-test repos's as siblings. That's how XalanJ, builds are
organized for the developer.
For a XalanJ src distribution user, we provide the XalanJ distribution
files xalan-j_2_7_3-src.zip/xalan-j_2_7_3-src.tar.gz.
We originally agreed that, the XalanJ src distribution user, would get
the entire contents of folder xalan-test within the src.zip/tar.gz.
files. The XalanJ src distribution builds (for the implementation and
the tests) are organized around this folder structure relationship.
Firstly, the XalanJ user has to be within the src distribution root
(after user does the unzip of the XalanJ src distribution), and run
the command 'build clean fulldist' to produce the XalanJ build which
the user might want to test with XalanJ test suite. Then the XalanJ
user needs to go within the xalan-test folder (within the XalanJ src
distribution folder structure), and can run XalanJ tests from there,
as described within the XalanJ README file.
--
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org>.
Hi Joseph,
On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 8:18 PM cc Kesselman <ke...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>
> I've certainly been running the tests with xalan-java and xalan-test as siblings checked out into the same parent directory, and I believe that is what the build now assumes. It also makes more sense when working with these in Eclipse, which expects projects to be siblings.
A XalanJ developer, is expected to check-out the xalan-java and
xalan-test repos's as siblings. That's how XalanJ, builds are
organized for the developer.
For a XalanJ src distribution user, we provide the XalanJ distribution
files xalan-j_2_7_3-src.zip/xalan-j_2_7_3-src.tar.gz.
We originally agreed that, the XalanJ src distribution user, would get
the entire contents of folder xalan-test within the src.zip/tar.gz.
files. The XalanJ src distribution builds (for the implementation and
the tests) are organized around this folder structure relationship.
Firstly, the XalanJ user has to be within the src distribution root
(after user does the unzip of the XalanJ src distribution), and run
the command 'build clean fulldist' to produce the XalanJ build which
the user might want to test with XalanJ test suite. Then the XalanJ
user needs to go within the xalan-test folder (within the XalanJ src
distribution folder structure), and can run XalanJ tests from there,
as described within the XalanJ README file.
--
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@xalan.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@xalan.apache.org
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Joseph Kesselman <ke...@alum.mit.edu>.
I've certainly been running the tests with xalan-java and xalan-test as siblings checked out into the same parent directory, and I believe that is what the build now assumes. It also makes more sense when working with these in Eclipse, which expects projects to be siblings.
--
/_ Joe Kesselman (he/him/his)
-/ _) My Alexa skill for New Music/New Sounds fans:
/ https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09WJ3H657/
() Plaintext Ribbon Campaign
/\ Stamp out HTML mail!
________________________________
From: Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org>
Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2023 9:13:06 AM
To: Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
Cc: dev@xalan.apache.org <de...@xalan.apache.org>; xalan-j-users@apache.org <xa...@apache.org>; private@xalan.apache.org <pr...@xalan.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Hi Gary,
On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 6:22 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> - Following the README, there is confusion because the unzipped src zip creates a `xalan-test` folder as a child folder but the README describes it as a sibling folder. Does this skew the tests or cause issues?
The XalanJ READMEfile, mentions following with respect to this point,
"For XalanJ source distribution users, xalan-test folder is located at
the root of the XalanJ source distribution folder (i.e, parallel to
folders "src", "tools" etc within the main XalanJ
codebase folder location), from where XalanJ source distribution users
may run XalanJ tests, by using the "build" script located at this
folder location"
I really meant that, the XalanJ source distribution users, need to go
within the xalan-test folder and use the build scripts located there,
to run XalanJ tests. I apologize that, I might not have written the
best possible English language grammar to describe these points.
--
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@xalan.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@xalan.apache.org
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Joseph Kesselman <ke...@alum.mit.edu>.
I've certainly been running the tests with xalan-java and xalan-test as siblings checked out into the same parent directory, and I believe that is what the build now assumes. It also makes more sense when working with these in Eclipse, which expects projects to be siblings.
--
/_ Joe Kesselman (he/him/his)
-/ _) My Alexa skill for New Music/New Sounds fans:
/ https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09WJ3H657/
() Plaintext Ribbon Campaign
/\ Stamp out HTML mail!
________________________________
From: Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org>
Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2023 9:13:06 AM
To: Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
Cc: dev@xalan.apache.org <de...@xalan.apache.org>; xalan-j-users@apache.org <xa...@apache.org>; private@xalan.apache.org <pr...@xalan.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Hi Gary,
On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 6:22 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> - Following the README, there is confusion because the unzipped src zip creates a `xalan-test` folder as a child folder but the README describes it as a sibling folder. Does this skew the tests or cause issues?
The XalanJ READMEfile, mentions following with respect to this point,
"For XalanJ source distribution users, xalan-test folder is located at
the root of the XalanJ source distribution folder (i.e, parallel to
folders "src", "tools" etc within the main XalanJ
codebase folder location), from where XalanJ source distribution users
may run XalanJ tests, by using the "build" script located at this
folder location"
I really meant that, the XalanJ source distribution users, need to go
within the xalan-test folder and use the build scripts located there,
to run XalanJ tests. I apologize that, I might not have written the
best possible English language grammar to describe these points.
--
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@xalan.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@xalan.apache.org
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org>.
Hi Gary,
On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 6:22 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> - Following the README, there is confusion because the unzipped src zip creates a `xalan-test` folder as a child folder but the README describes it as a sibling folder. Does this skew the tests or cause issues?
The XalanJ READMEfile, mentions following with respect to this point,
"For XalanJ source distribution users, xalan-test folder is located at
the root of the XalanJ source distribution folder (i.e, parallel to
folders "src", "tools" etc within the main XalanJ
codebase folder location), from where XalanJ source distribution users
may run XalanJ tests, by using the "build" script located at this
folder location"
I really meant that, the XalanJ source distribution users, need to go
within the xalan-test folder and use the build scripts located there,
to run XalanJ tests. I apologize that, I might not have written the
best possible English language grammar to describe these points.
--
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@xalan.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@xalan.apache.org
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Elliotte Rusty Harold <el...@ibiblio.org>.
Michael Glavassevich is still active on the Xerces-J project. Not sure
if he's subscribed to this mailing list or not, but I suggest pinging
him.
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 1:37 PM Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Gary,
>
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 5:50 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Where is the 3rd binding vote? I might have missed it.
>
> I can see that, the latest Xalan pmc records show that, following are
> the currently eligible Xalan pmc members to cast binding votes for the
> releases,
>
> Bill Blough, Gary D. Gregory, Michael Glavassevich, Mukul Gandhi,
> Roger Leigh
>
> We've currently achieved two Xalan release binding votes for this RC as follows,
> Gary Gregory,
> Mukul Gandhi
>
> We still need, at least one more Xalan release binding vote, to have
> this XalanJ RC approved as a release.
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Mukul Gandhi
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@xalan.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@xalan.apache.org
>
--
Elliotte Rusty Harold
elharo@ibiblio.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@xalan.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@xalan.apache.org
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
"the 'minimum quorum of three +1 votes' rule is universal."
Gary
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023, 10:27 Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Gary,
>
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 7:31 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > This makes no sense to me. We need another +1 from a PMC member, one
> > PMC member equals one vote, not 2.
>
> The document https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html, says
> following,
>
> "Voting periods should generally run for at least 72 hours to provide
> an opportunity for all concerned persons to participate, regardless of
> their geographic location." [1]
>
> I think, if we receive one more +1 vote from a PMC member, that shall
> be an ideal result for this vote to pass.
>
> But the point [1] mentioned above, makes me feel that, if we don't get
> one more +1 vote within next few days, we can possibly have this
> XalanJ RC approved to be a release.
>
> Meanwhile, I'm explicitly copying this mail, to Michael Glavassevich
> as well, so that he can try his best to vote for this XalanJ RC.
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Mukul Gandhi
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: private-unsubscribe@xalan.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: private-help@xalan.apache.org
>
>
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
"the 'minimum quorum of three +1 votes' rule is universal."
Gary
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023, 10:27 Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Gary,
>
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 7:31 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > This makes no sense to me. We need another +1 from a PMC member, one
> > PMC member equals one vote, not 2.
>
> The document https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html, says
> following,
>
> "Voting periods should generally run for at least 72 hours to provide
> an opportunity for all concerned persons to participate, regardless of
> their geographic location." [1]
>
> I think, if we receive one more +1 vote from a PMC member, that shall
> be an ideal result for this vote to pass.
>
> But the point [1] mentioned above, makes me feel that, if we don't get
> one more +1 vote within next few days, we can possibly have this
> XalanJ RC approved to be a release.
>
> Meanwhile, I'm explicitly copying this mail, to Michael Glavassevich
> as well, so that he can try his best to vote for this XalanJ RC.
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Mukul Gandhi
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: private-unsubscribe@xalan.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: private-help@xalan.apache.org
>
>
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org>.
Hi Gary,
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 7:31 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This makes no sense to me. We need another +1 from a PMC member, one
> PMC member equals one vote, not 2.
The document https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html, says following,
"Voting periods should generally run for at least 72 hours to provide
an opportunity for all concerned persons to participate, regardless of
their geographic location." [1]
I think, if we receive one more +1 vote from a PMC member, that shall
be an ideal result for this vote to pass.
But the point [1] mentioned above, makes me feel that, if we don't get
one more +1 vote within next few days, we can possibly have this
XalanJ RC approved to be a release.
Meanwhile, I'm explicitly copying this mail, to Michael Glavassevich
as well, so that he can try his best to vote for this XalanJ RC.
--
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@xalan.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@xalan.apache.org
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org>.
Hi all,
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 7:32 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Please see https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
I wish to apply the principle of lazy consensus, to this vote.
"The codebase changes within XalanJ 2.7.3 release have been applied
with consensus of all concerned. If no-one objects within three days,
I'll assume lazy consensus and commit it."
--
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@xalan.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@xalan.apache.org
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org>.
Hi all,
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 7:32 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Please see https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
I wish to apply the principle of lazy consensus, to this vote.
"The codebase changes within XalanJ 2.7.3 release have been applied
with consensus of all concerned. If no-one objects within three days,
I'll assume lazy consensus and commit it."
--
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org>.
Hi Gary & all,
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 7:32 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Please see https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
From this cited link, I'm able to learn that, we need at least 3 +1
pmc votes to have this RC, progress as the next XalanJ release (i.e,
2.7.3).
As of now, therefore, we need at least one more Xalan pmc +1 vote, to
have this Xalan RC ready to be released.
I'll request, other Xalan pmc members, to please review this RC and
make there votes.
--
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org>.
Hi Gary & all,
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 7:32 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Please see https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
From this cited link, I'm able to learn that, we need at least 3 +1
pmc votes to have this RC, progress as the next XalanJ release (i.e,
2.7.3).
As of now, therefore, we need at least one more Xalan pmc +1 vote, to
have this Xalan RC ready to be released.
I'll request, other Xalan pmc members, to please review this RC and
make there votes.
--
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@xalan.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@xalan.apache.org
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
Please see https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
Gary
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 10:01 AM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 9:49 AM Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Gary,
> >
> > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 5:50 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Where is the 3rd binding vote? I might have missed it.
> > >
> > > I can see that, the latest Xalan pmc records show that, following are
> > > the currently eligible Xalan pmc members to cast binding votes for the
> > > releases,
> > >
> > > Bill Blough, Gary D. Gregory, Michael Glavassevich, Mukul Gandhi,
> > > Roger Leigh
> > >
> > > We've currently achieved two Xalan release binding votes for this RC as follows,
> > > Gary Gregory,
> > > Mukul Gandhi
> > >
> > > We still need, at least one more Xalan release binding vote, to have
> > > this XalanJ RC approved as a release.
> >
> > I've just seen an email from, Apache's respected Rich Bowen, where he
> > says following,
> >
> > "Every PMC member has an equal voice in deliberations. Each has one
> > vote. Each has veto power. Every vote weighs the same. It is not only
> > your right, but it is your obligation, to use that vote for the good
> > of the project and its users, not to appease the Chair, your employer,
> > or any other voice in the project."
> >
> > I think, you and myself, have veto privileges to add one more +1 vote
> > for this XalanJ release.
> >
> > I'm please, using my veto privilege, to add one more +1 vote for this
> > XalanJ release.
>
> This makes no sense to me. We need another +1 from a PMC member, one
> PMC member equals one vote, not 2.
>
> Gary
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Mukul Gandhi
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: private-unsubscribe@xalan.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: private-help@xalan.apache.org
> >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@xalan.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@xalan.apache.org
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
Please see https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
Gary
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 10:01 AM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 9:49 AM Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Gary,
> >
> > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 5:50 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Where is the 3rd binding vote? I might have missed it.
> > >
> > > I can see that, the latest Xalan pmc records show that, following are
> > > the currently eligible Xalan pmc members to cast binding votes for the
> > > releases,
> > >
> > > Bill Blough, Gary D. Gregory, Michael Glavassevich, Mukul Gandhi,
> > > Roger Leigh
> > >
> > > We've currently achieved two Xalan release binding votes for this RC as follows,
> > > Gary Gregory,
> > > Mukul Gandhi
> > >
> > > We still need, at least one more Xalan release binding vote, to have
> > > this XalanJ RC approved as a release.
> >
> > I've just seen an email from, Apache's respected Rich Bowen, where he
> > says following,
> >
> > "Every PMC member has an equal voice in deliberations. Each has one
> > vote. Each has veto power. Every vote weighs the same. It is not only
> > your right, but it is your obligation, to use that vote for the good
> > of the project and its users, not to appease the Chair, your employer,
> > or any other voice in the project."
> >
> > I think, you and myself, have veto privileges to add one more +1 vote
> > for this XalanJ release.
> >
> > I'm please, using my veto privilege, to add one more +1 vote for this
> > XalanJ release.
>
> This makes no sense to me. We need another +1 from a PMC member, one
> PMC member equals one vote, not 2.
>
> Gary
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Mukul Gandhi
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: private-unsubscribe@xalan.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: private-help@xalan.apache.org
> >
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org>.
Hi Gary,
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 7:31 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This makes no sense to me. We need another +1 from a PMC member, one
> PMC member equals one vote, not 2.
The document https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html, says following,
"Voting periods should generally run for at least 72 hours to provide
an opportunity for all concerned persons to participate, regardless of
their geographic location." [1]
I think, if we receive one more +1 vote from a PMC member, that shall
be an ideal result for this vote to pass.
But the point [1] mentioned above, makes me feel that, if we don't get
one more +1 vote within next few days, we can possibly have this
XalanJ RC approved to be a release.
Meanwhile, I'm explicitly copying this mail, to Michael Glavassevich
as well, so that he can try his best to vote for this XalanJ RC.
--
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 9:49 AM Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Gary,
>
> > On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 5:50 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Where is the 3rd binding vote? I might have missed it.
> >
> > I can see that, the latest Xalan pmc records show that, following are
> > the currently eligible Xalan pmc members to cast binding votes for the
> > releases,
> >
> > Bill Blough, Gary D. Gregory, Michael Glavassevich, Mukul Gandhi,
> > Roger Leigh
> >
> > We've currently achieved two Xalan release binding votes for this RC as follows,
> > Gary Gregory,
> > Mukul Gandhi
> >
> > We still need, at least one more Xalan release binding vote, to have
> > this XalanJ RC approved as a release.
>
> I've just seen an email from, Apache's respected Rich Bowen, where he
> says following,
>
> "Every PMC member has an equal voice in deliberations. Each has one
> vote. Each has veto power. Every vote weighs the same. It is not only
> your right, but it is your obligation, to use that vote for the good
> of the project and its users, not to appease the Chair, your employer,
> or any other voice in the project."
>
> I think, you and myself, have veto privileges to add one more +1 vote
> for this XalanJ release.
>
> I'm please, using my veto privilege, to add one more +1 vote for this
> XalanJ release.
This makes no sense to me. We need another +1 from a PMC member, one
PMC member equals one vote, not 2.
Gary
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Mukul Gandhi
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: private-unsubscribe@xalan.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: private-help@xalan.apache.org
>
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 9:49 AM Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Gary,
>
> > On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 5:50 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Where is the 3rd binding vote? I might have missed it.
> >
> > I can see that, the latest Xalan pmc records show that, following are
> > the currently eligible Xalan pmc members to cast binding votes for the
> > releases,
> >
> > Bill Blough, Gary D. Gregory, Michael Glavassevich, Mukul Gandhi,
> > Roger Leigh
> >
> > We've currently achieved two Xalan release binding votes for this RC as follows,
> > Gary Gregory,
> > Mukul Gandhi
> >
> > We still need, at least one more Xalan release binding vote, to have
> > this XalanJ RC approved as a release.
>
> I've just seen an email from, Apache's respected Rich Bowen, where he
> says following,
>
> "Every PMC member has an equal voice in deliberations. Each has one
> vote. Each has veto power. Every vote weighs the same. It is not only
> your right, but it is your obligation, to use that vote for the good
> of the project and its users, not to appease the Chair, your employer,
> or any other voice in the project."
>
> I think, you and myself, have veto privileges to add one more +1 vote
> for this XalanJ release.
>
> I'm please, using my veto privilege, to add one more +1 vote for this
> XalanJ release.
This makes no sense to me. We need another +1 from a PMC member, one
PMC member equals one vote, not 2.
Gary
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Mukul Gandhi
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: private-unsubscribe@xalan.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: private-help@xalan.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@xalan.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@xalan.apache.org
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Milamber <mi...@apache.org>.
Hi Mukul,
No need to add another +1 vote. The rules of voting are clear on this point.
https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
If the 72 hours delay is done, and *no* -1 binding vote, and two +1
vote, all seems good for me to release the RC10.
Regards,
Bruno
On 29/03/2023 13:49, Mukul Gandhi wrote:
> Hi Gary,
>
>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 5:50 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Where is the 3rd binding vote? I might have missed it.
>> I can see that, the latest Xalan pmc records show that, following are
>> the currently eligible Xalan pmc members to cast binding votes for the
>> releases,
>>
>> Bill Blough, Gary D. Gregory, Michael Glavassevich, Mukul Gandhi,
>> Roger Leigh
>>
>> We've currently achieved two Xalan release binding votes for this RC as follows,
>> Gary Gregory,
>> Mukul Gandhi
>>
>> We still need, at least one more Xalan release binding vote, to have
>> this XalanJ RC approved as a release.
> I've just seen an email from, Apache's respected Rich Bowen, where he
> says following,
>
> "Every PMC member has an equal voice in deliberations. Each has one
> vote. Each has veto power. Every vote weighs the same. It is not only
> your right, but it is your obligation, to use that vote for the good
> of the project and its users, not to appease the Chair, your employer,
> or any other voice in the project."
>
> I think, you and myself, have veto privileges to add one more +1 vote
> for this XalanJ release.
>
> I'm please, using my veto privilege, to add one more +1 vote for this
> XalanJ release.
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@xalan.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@xalan.apache.org
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Milamber <mi...@apache.org>.
Hi Mukul,
No need to add another +1 vote. The rules of voting are clear on this point.
https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
If the 72 hours delay is done, and *no* -1 binding vote, and two +1
vote, all seems good for me to release the RC10.
Regards,
Bruno
On 29/03/2023 13:49, Mukul Gandhi wrote:
> Hi Gary,
>
>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 5:50 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Where is the 3rd binding vote? I might have missed it.
>> I can see that, the latest Xalan pmc records show that, following are
>> the currently eligible Xalan pmc members to cast binding votes for the
>> releases,
>>
>> Bill Blough, Gary D. Gregory, Michael Glavassevich, Mukul Gandhi,
>> Roger Leigh
>>
>> We've currently achieved two Xalan release binding votes for this RC as follows,
>> Gary Gregory,
>> Mukul Gandhi
>>
>> We still need, at least one more Xalan release binding vote, to have
>> this XalanJ RC approved as a release.
> I've just seen an email from, Apache's respected Rich Bowen, where he
> says following,
>
> "Every PMC member has an equal voice in deliberations. Each has one
> vote. Each has veto power. Every vote weighs the same. It is not only
> your right, but it is your obligation, to use that vote for the good
> of the project and its users, not to appease the Chair, your employer,
> or any other voice in the project."
>
> I think, you and myself, have veto privileges to add one more +1 vote
> for this XalanJ release.
>
> I'm please, using my veto privilege, to add one more +1 vote for this
> XalanJ release.
>
>
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org>.
Hi Gary,
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 5:50 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Where is the 3rd binding vote? I might have missed it.
>
> I can see that, the latest Xalan pmc records show that, following are
> the currently eligible Xalan pmc members to cast binding votes for the
> releases,
>
> Bill Blough, Gary D. Gregory, Michael Glavassevich, Mukul Gandhi,
> Roger Leigh
>
> We've currently achieved two Xalan release binding votes for this RC as follows,
> Gary Gregory,
> Mukul Gandhi
>
> We still need, at least one more Xalan release binding vote, to have
> this XalanJ RC approved as a release.
I've just seen an email from, Apache's respected Rich Bowen, where he
says following,
"Every PMC member has an equal voice in deliberations. Each has one
vote. Each has veto power. Every vote weighs the same. It is not only
your right, but it is your obligation, to use that vote for the good
of the project and its users, not to appease the Chair, your employer,
or any other voice in the project."
I think, you and myself, have veto privileges to add one more +1 vote
for this XalanJ release.
I'm please, using my veto privilege, to add one more +1 vote for this
XalanJ release.
--
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@xalan.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@xalan.apache.org
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org>.
Hi Gary,
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 5:50 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Where is the 3rd binding vote? I might have missed it.
>
> I can see that, the latest Xalan pmc records show that, following are
> the currently eligible Xalan pmc members to cast binding votes for the
> releases,
>
> Bill Blough, Gary D. Gregory, Michael Glavassevich, Mukul Gandhi,
> Roger Leigh
>
> We've currently achieved two Xalan release binding votes for this RC as follows,
> Gary Gregory,
> Mukul Gandhi
>
> We still need, at least one more Xalan release binding vote, to have
> this XalanJ RC approved as a release.
I've just seen an email from, Apache's respected Rich Bowen, where he
says following,
"Every PMC member has an equal voice in deliberations. Each has one
vote. Each has veto power. Every vote weighs the same. It is not only
your right, but it is your obligation, to use that vote for the good
of the project and its users, not to appease the Chair, your employer,
or any other voice in the project."
I think, you and myself, have veto privileges to add one more +1 vote
for this XalanJ release.
I'm please, using my veto privilege, to add one more +1 vote for this
XalanJ release.
--
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org>.
Hi Gary,
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 5:50 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Where is the 3rd binding vote? I might have missed it.
I can see that, the latest Xalan pmc records show that, following are
the currently eligible Xalan pmc members to cast binding votes for the
releases,
Bill Blough, Gary D. Gregory, Michael Glavassevich, Mukul Gandhi,
Roger Leigh
We've currently achieved two Xalan release binding votes for this RC as follows,
Gary Gregory,
Mukul Gandhi
We still need, at least one more Xalan release binding vote, to have
this XalanJ RC approved as a release.
--
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@xalan.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@xalan.apache.org
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Milamber <mi...@apache.org>.
Hi Gary,
In the vote process (in ASF), the count of +1 doesn't matter, only -1
vote (veto) are blocker for the vote. So no need the 3rd +1 (binding)
(even if will be better)
If the number of binding vote is too small (2 votes versus 5 PMC
members), after the 72 hours vote period (or more time), the lazy
consensus should use (I suppose), otherwise the release will never done.
Milamber
On 29/03/2023 12:20, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 8:04 AM Milamber <milamber@apache.org
> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 29/03/2023 11:49, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> Ah! Please accept my apologies!
>
> 👍
>
> So, with last email from Mukul, just need to have the [RESULT]
> vote mail from Mukul to officially have the new xalan release!
>
>
> Where is the 3rd binding vote? I might have missed it. The result
> email will list all votes.
>
> Gary
>
>
> Thanks for the contributors (Joseph, Mukul, etc.)
>
> Milamber
>
>>
>> Gary
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023, 06:52 Milamber <milamber@apache.org
>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On vote call, Mukul have add this line at the end of mail:
>>
>>> Great work everyone. Here's my +1 for this RC.
>>
>> So two +1 for this vote (you and Mukul)
>>
>> Milamber
>>
>> On 29/03/2023 10:37, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>> I count one +1 vote (from me). Mukul still has to officially
>>> reply with a +1 if he so desires to vote even though he
>>> called the vote.
>>>
>>> Gary
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023, 06:33 Milamber <milamber@apache.org
>>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I count 2 +1 from PMC member. The vote can passes
>>> because no veto (-1
>>> vote) and perhaps this vote is on under the lazy
>>> consensus way?
>>>
>>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>>>
>>> "Votes on procedural issues follow the common format of
>>> majority rule
>>> unless otherwise stated. That is, if there are more
>>> favourable votes
>>> than unfavourable ones, the issue is considered to have
>>> passed --
>>> regardless of the number of votes in each category. (If
>>> the number of
>>> votes seems too small to be representative of a
>>> community consensus, the
>>> issue is typically not pursued. However, see the
>>> description of lazy
>>> consensus for a modifying factor.)"
>>>
>>>
>>> Milamber
>>>
>>> On 29/03/2023 10:03, Mukul Gandhi wrote:
>>> > Hi all,
>>> > We need more Xalan pmc reviews, to have this RC
>>> declared to be approved.
>>> >
>>> > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 6:22 PM Gary Gregory
>>> <garydgregory@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
>>> wrote:
>>> >> Thank you Mukul for this RC.
>>> >>
>>> >> +1
>>> >>
>>> >> - Reviewing src zip: ASC, SHA files OK.
>>> >> - Building runtime with 'chmod +x ./build.sh &&
>>> ./build.sh clean fulldist' OK.
>>> >> - Following the README, there is confusion because
>>> the unzipped src zip creates a `xalan-test` folder as a
>>> child folder but the README describes it as a sibling
>>> folder. Does this skew the tests or cause issues?
>>> >> - TODOs later:
>>> >> -- Fix Javadoc errors
>>> >> -- Test output should be quieter in non-debug mode:
>>> No need to tell me all the test files that PASS, I have
>>> no idea if I am missing any failure output without
>>> tediously reviewing ALL console output.
>>> >>
>>> >> Using:
>>> >>
>>> >> ant -version
>>> >> Apache Ant(TM) version 1.10.13 compiled on January 4 2023
>>> >>
>>> >> java -version
>>> >> openjdk version "1.8.0_362"
>>> >> OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build
>>> 1.8.0_362-bre_2023_01_22_03_32-b00)
>>> >> OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.362-b00, mixed mode)
>>> >>
>>> >> uname -a
>>> >> Darwin *** 22.3.0 Darwin Kernel Version 22.3.0: Mon
>>> Jan 30 20:42:11 PST 2023;
>>> root:xnu-8792.81.3~2/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64
>>> >>
>>> >> Gary
>>> >
>>>
>>
>
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Milamber <mi...@apache.org>.
Hi Gary,
In the vote process (in ASF), the count of +1 doesn't matter, only -1
vote (veto) are blocker for the vote. So no need the 3rd +1 (binding)
(even if will be better)
If the number of binding vote is too small (2 votes versus 5 PMC
members), after the 72 hours vote period (or more time), the lazy
consensus should use (I suppose), otherwise the release will never done.
Milamber
On 29/03/2023 12:20, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 8:04 AM Milamber <milamber@apache.org
> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 29/03/2023 11:49, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> Ah! Please accept my apologies!
>
> 👍
>
> So, with last email from Mukul, just need to have the [RESULT]
> vote mail from Mukul to officially have the new xalan release!
>
>
> Where is the 3rd binding vote? I might have missed it. The result
> email will list all votes.
>
> Gary
>
>
> Thanks for the contributors (Joseph, Mukul, etc.)
>
> Milamber
>
>>
>> Gary
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023, 06:52 Milamber <milamber@apache.org
>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On vote call, Mukul have add this line at the end of mail:
>>
>>> Great work everyone. Here's my +1 for this RC.
>>
>> So two +1 for this vote (you and Mukul)
>>
>> Milamber
>>
>> On 29/03/2023 10:37, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>> I count one +1 vote (from me). Mukul still has to officially
>>> reply with a +1 if he so desires to vote even though he
>>> called the vote.
>>>
>>> Gary
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023, 06:33 Milamber <milamber@apache.org
>>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I count 2 +1 from PMC member. The vote can passes
>>> because no veto (-1
>>> vote) and perhaps this vote is on under the lazy
>>> consensus way?
>>>
>>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>>>
>>> "Votes on procedural issues follow the common format of
>>> majority rule
>>> unless otherwise stated. That is, if there are more
>>> favourable votes
>>> than unfavourable ones, the issue is considered to have
>>> passed --
>>> regardless of the number of votes in each category. (If
>>> the number of
>>> votes seems too small to be representative of a
>>> community consensus, the
>>> issue is typically not pursued. However, see the
>>> description of lazy
>>> consensus for a modifying factor.)"
>>>
>>>
>>> Milamber
>>>
>>> On 29/03/2023 10:03, Mukul Gandhi wrote:
>>> > Hi all,
>>> > We need more Xalan pmc reviews, to have this RC
>>> declared to be approved.
>>> >
>>> > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 6:22 PM Gary Gregory
>>> <garydgregory@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
>>> wrote:
>>> >> Thank you Mukul for this RC.
>>> >>
>>> >> +1
>>> >>
>>> >> - Reviewing src zip: ASC, SHA files OK.
>>> >> - Building runtime with 'chmod +x ./build.sh &&
>>> ./build.sh clean fulldist' OK.
>>> >> - Following the README, there is confusion because
>>> the unzipped src zip creates a `xalan-test` folder as a
>>> child folder but the README describes it as a sibling
>>> folder. Does this skew the tests or cause issues?
>>> >> - TODOs later:
>>> >> -- Fix Javadoc errors
>>> >> -- Test output should be quieter in non-debug mode:
>>> No need to tell me all the test files that PASS, I have
>>> no idea if I am missing any failure output without
>>> tediously reviewing ALL console output.
>>> >>
>>> >> Using:
>>> >>
>>> >> ant -version
>>> >> Apache Ant(TM) version 1.10.13 compiled on January 4 2023
>>> >>
>>> >> java -version
>>> >> openjdk version "1.8.0_362"
>>> >> OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build
>>> 1.8.0_362-bre_2023_01_22_03_32-b00)
>>> >> OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.362-b00, mixed mode)
>>> >>
>>> >> uname -a
>>> >> Darwin *** 22.3.0 Darwin Kernel Version 22.3.0: Mon
>>> Jan 30 20:42:11 PST 2023;
>>> root:xnu-8792.81.3~2/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64
>>> >>
>>> >> Gary
>>> >
>>>
>>
>
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org>.
Hi Gary,
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 5:50 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Where is the 3rd binding vote? I might have missed it.
I can see that, the latest Xalan pmc records show that, following are
the currently eligible Xalan pmc members to cast binding votes for the
releases,
Bill Blough, Gary D. Gregory, Michael Glavassevich, Mukul Gandhi,
Roger Leigh
We've currently achieved two Xalan release binding votes for this RC as follows,
Gary Gregory,
Mukul Gandhi
We still need, at least one more Xalan release binding vote, to have
this XalanJ RC approved as a release.
--
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 8:04 AM Milamber <mi...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
> On 29/03/2023 11:49, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> Ah! Please accept my apologies!
>
>
> 👍
>
> So, with last email from Mukul, just need to have the [RESULT] vote mail
> from Mukul to officially have the new xalan release!
>
Where is the 3rd binding vote? I might have missed it. The result email
will list all votes.
Gary
>
> Thanks for the contributors (Joseph, Mukul, etc.)
>
> Milamber
>
>
> Gary
>
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023, 06:52 Milamber <mi...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On vote call, Mukul have add this line at the end of mail:
>>
>> Great work everyone. Here's my +1 for this RC.
>>
>>
>> So two +1 for this vote (you and Mukul)
>>
>> Milamber
>>
>> On 29/03/2023 10:37, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>
>> I count one +1 vote (from me). Mukul still has to officially reply with a
>> +1 if he so desires to vote even though he called the vote.
>>
>> Gary
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023, 06:33 Milamber <mi...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I count 2 +1 from PMC member. The vote can passes because no veto (-1
>>> vote) and perhaps this vote is on under the lazy consensus way?
>>>
>>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>>>
>>> "Votes on procedural issues follow the common format of majority rule
>>> unless otherwise stated. That is, if there are more favourable votes
>>> than unfavourable ones, the issue is considered to have passed --
>>> regardless of the number of votes in each category. (If the number of
>>> votes seems too small to be representative of a community consensus, the
>>> issue is typically not pursued. However, see the description of lazy
>>> consensus for a modifying factor.)"
>>>
>>>
>>> Milamber
>>>
>>> On 29/03/2023 10:03, Mukul Gandhi wrote:
>>> > Hi all,
>>> > We need more Xalan pmc reviews, to have this RC declared to be
>>> approved.
>>> >
>>> > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 6:22 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >> Thank you Mukul for this RC.
>>> >>
>>> >> +1
>>> >>
>>> >> - Reviewing src zip: ASC, SHA files OK.
>>> >> - Building runtime with 'chmod +x ./build.sh && ./build.sh clean
>>> fulldist' OK.
>>> >> - Following the README, there is confusion because the unzipped src
>>> zip creates a `xalan-test` folder as a child folder but the README
>>> describes it as a sibling folder. Does this skew the tests or cause issues?
>>> >> - TODOs later:
>>> >> -- Fix Javadoc errors
>>> >> -- Test output should be quieter in non-debug mode: No need to tell
>>> me all the test files that PASS, I have no idea if I am missing any failure
>>> output without tediously reviewing ALL console output.
>>> >>
>>> >> Using:
>>> >>
>>> >> ant -version
>>> >> Apache Ant(TM) version 1.10.13 compiled on January 4 2023
>>> >>
>>> >> java -version
>>> >> openjdk version "1.8.0_362"
>>> >> OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_362-bre_2023_01_22_03_32-b00)
>>> >> OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.362-b00, mixed mode)
>>> >>
>>> >> uname -a
>>> >> Darwin *** 22.3.0 Darwin Kernel Version 22.3.0: Mon Jan 30 20:42:11
>>> PST 2023; root:xnu-8792.81.3~2/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64
>>> >>
>>> >> Gary
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 8:04 AM Milamber <mi...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
> On 29/03/2023 11:49, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> Ah! Please accept my apologies!
>
>
> 👍
>
> So, with last email from Mukul, just need to have the [RESULT] vote mail
> from Mukul to officially have the new xalan release!
>
Where is the 3rd binding vote? I might have missed it. The result email
will list all votes.
Gary
>
> Thanks for the contributors (Joseph, Mukul, etc.)
>
> Milamber
>
>
> Gary
>
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023, 06:52 Milamber <mi...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On vote call, Mukul have add this line at the end of mail:
>>
>> Great work everyone. Here's my +1 for this RC.
>>
>>
>> So two +1 for this vote (you and Mukul)
>>
>> Milamber
>>
>> On 29/03/2023 10:37, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>
>> I count one +1 vote (from me). Mukul still has to officially reply with a
>> +1 if he so desires to vote even though he called the vote.
>>
>> Gary
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023, 06:33 Milamber <mi...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I count 2 +1 from PMC member. The vote can passes because no veto (-1
>>> vote) and perhaps this vote is on under the lazy consensus way?
>>>
>>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>>>
>>> "Votes on procedural issues follow the common format of majority rule
>>> unless otherwise stated. That is, if there are more favourable votes
>>> than unfavourable ones, the issue is considered to have passed --
>>> regardless of the number of votes in each category. (If the number of
>>> votes seems too small to be representative of a community consensus, the
>>> issue is typically not pursued. However, see the description of lazy
>>> consensus for a modifying factor.)"
>>>
>>>
>>> Milamber
>>>
>>> On 29/03/2023 10:03, Mukul Gandhi wrote:
>>> > Hi all,
>>> > We need more Xalan pmc reviews, to have this RC declared to be
>>> approved.
>>> >
>>> > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 6:22 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >> Thank you Mukul for this RC.
>>> >>
>>> >> +1
>>> >>
>>> >> - Reviewing src zip: ASC, SHA files OK.
>>> >> - Building runtime with 'chmod +x ./build.sh && ./build.sh clean
>>> fulldist' OK.
>>> >> - Following the README, there is confusion because the unzipped src
>>> zip creates a `xalan-test` folder as a child folder but the README
>>> describes it as a sibling folder. Does this skew the tests or cause issues?
>>> >> - TODOs later:
>>> >> -- Fix Javadoc errors
>>> >> -- Test output should be quieter in non-debug mode: No need to tell
>>> me all the test files that PASS, I have no idea if I am missing any failure
>>> output without tediously reviewing ALL console output.
>>> >>
>>> >> Using:
>>> >>
>>> >> ant -version
>>> >> Apache Ant(TM) version 1.10.13 compiled on January 4 2023
>>> >>
>>> >> java -version
>>> >> openjdk version "1.8.0_362"
>>> >> OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_362-bre_2023_01_22_03_32-b00)
>>> >> OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.362-b00, mixed mode)
>>> >>
>>> >> uname -a
>>> >> Darwin *** 22.3.0 Darwin Kernel Version 22.3.0: Mon Jan 30 20:42:11
>>> PST 2023; root:xnu-8792.81.3~2/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64
>>> >>
>>> >> Gary
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Milamber <mi...@apache.org>.
On 29/03/2023 11:49, Gary Gregory wrote:
> Ah! Please accept my apologies!
👍
So, with last email from Mukul, just need to have the [RESULT] vote mail
from Mukul to officially have the new xalan release!
Thanks for the contributors (Joseph, Mukul, etc.)
Milamber
>
> Gary
>
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023, 06:52 Milamber <milamber@apache.org
> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On vote call, Mukul have add this line at the end of mail:
>
>> Great work everyone. Here's my +1 for this RC.
>
> So two +1 for this vote (you and Mukul)
>
> Milamber
>
> On 29/03/2023 10:37, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> I count one +1 vote (from me). Mukul still has to officially
>> reply with a +1 if he so desires to vote even though he called
>> the vote.
>>
>> Gary
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023, 06:33 Milamber <milamber@apache.org
>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I count 2 +1 from PMC member. The vote can passes because no
>> veto (-1
>> vote) and perhaps this vote is on under the lazy consensus way?
>>
>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>>
>> "Votes on procedural issues follow the common format of
>> majority rule
>> unless otherwise stated. That is, if there are more
>> favourable votes
>> than unfavourable ones, the issue is considered to have
>> passed --
>> regardless of the number of votes in each category. (If the
>> number of
>> votes seems too small to be representative of a community
>> consensus, the
>> issue is typically not pursued. However, see the description
>> of lazy
>> consensus for a modifying factor.)"
>>
>>
>> Milamber
>>
>> On 29/03/2023 10:03, Mukul Gandhi wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> > We need more Xalan pmc reviews, to have this RC
>> declared to be approved.
>> >
>> > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 6:22 PM Gary Gregory
>> <garydgregory@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >> Thank you Mukul for this RC.
>> >>
>> >> +1
>> >>
>> >> - Reviewing src zip: ASC, SHA files OK.
>> >> - Building runtime with 'chmod +x ./build.sh && ./build.sh
>> clean fulldist' OK.
>> >> - Following the README, there is confusion because the
>> unzipped src zip creates a `xalan-test` folder as a child
>> folder but the README describes it as a sibling folder. Does
>> this skew the tests or cause issues?
>> >> - TODOs later:
>> >> -- Fix Javadoc errors
>> >> -- Test output should be quieter in non-debug mode: No
>> need to tell me all the test files that PASS, I have no idea
>> if I am missing any failure output without tediously
>> reviewing ALL console output.
>> >>
>> >> Using:
>> >>
>> >> ant -version
>> >> Apache Ant(TM) version 1.10.13 compiled on January 4 2023
>> >>
>> >> java -version
>> >> openjdk version "1.8.0_362"
>> >> OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build
>> 1.8.0_362-bre_2023_01_22_03_32-b00)
>> >> OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.362-b00, mixed mode)
>> >>
>> >> uname -a
>> >> Darwin *** 22.3.0 Darwin Kernel Version 22.3.0: Mon Jan 30
>> 20:42:11 PST 2023; root:xnu-8792.81.3~2/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64
>> >>
>> >> Gary
>> >
>>
>
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Milamber <mi...@apache.org>.
On 29/03/2023 11:49, Gary Gregory wrote:
> Ah! Please accept my apologies!
👍
So, with last email from Mukul, just need to have the [RESULT] vote mail
from Mukul to officially have the new xalan release!
Thanks for the contributors (Joseph, Mukul, etc.)
Milamber
>
> Gary
>
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023, 06:52 Milamber <milamber@apache.org
> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On vote call, Mukul have add this line at the end of mail:
>
>> Great work everyone. Here's my +1 for this RC.
>
> So two +1 for this vote (you and Mukul)
>
> Milamber
>
> On 29/03/2023 10:37, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> I count one +1 vote (from me). Mukul still has to officially
>> reply with a +1 if he so desires to vote even though he called
>> the vote.
>>
>> Gary
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023, 06:33 Milamber <milamber@apache.org
>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I count 2 +1 from PMC member. The vote can passes because no
>> veto (-1
>> vote) and perhaps this vote is on under the lazy consensus way?
>>
>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>>
>> "Votes on procedural issues follow the common format of
>> majority rule
>> unless otherwise stated. That is, if there are more
>> favourable votes
>> than unfavourable ones, the issue is considered to have
>> passed --
>> regardless of the number of votes in each category. (If the
>> number of
>> votes seems too small to be representative of a community
>> consensus, the
>> issue is typically not pursued. However, see the description
>> of lazy
>> consensus for a modifying factor.)"
>>
>>
>> Milamber
>>
>> On 29/03/2023 10:03, Mukul Gandhi wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> > We need more Xalan pmc reviews, to have this RC
>> declared to be approved.
>> >
>> > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 6:22 PM Gary Gregory
>> <garydgregory@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >> Thank you Mukul for this RC.
>> >>
>> >> +1
>> >>
>> >> - Reviewing src zip: ASC, SHA files OK.
>> >> - Building runtime with 'chmod +x ./build.sh && ./build.sh
>> clean fulldist' OK.
>> >> - Following the README, there is confusion because the
>> unzipped src zip creates a `xalan-test` folder as a child
>> folder but the README describes it as a sibling folder. Does
>> this skew the tests or cause issues?
>> >> - TODOs later:
>> >> -- Fix Javadoc errors
>> >> -- Test output should be quieter in non-debug mode: No
>> need to tell me all the test files that PASS, I have no idea
>> if I am missing any failure output without tediously
>> reviewing ALL console output.
>> >>
>> >> Using:
>> >>
>> >> ant -version
>> >> Apache Ant(TM) version 1.10.13 compiled on January 4 2023
>> >>
>> >> java -version
>> >> openjdk version "1.8.0_362"
>> >> OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build
>> 1.8.0_362-bre_2023_01_22_03_32-b00)
>> >> OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.362-b00, mixed mode)
>> >>
>> >> uname -a
>> >> Darwin *** 22.3.0 Darwin Kernel Version 22.3.0: Mon Jan 30
>> 20:42:11 PST 2023; root:xnu-8792.81.3~2/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64
>> >>
>> >> Gary
>> >
>>
>
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
Ah! Please accept my apologies!
Gary
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023, 06:52 Milamber <mi...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On vote call, Mukul have add this line at the end of mail:
>
> Great work everyone. Here's my +1 for this RC.
>
>
> So two +1 for this vote (you and Mukul)
>
> Milamber
>
> On 29/03/2023 10:37, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> I count one +1 vote (from me). Mukul still has to officially reply with a
> +1 if he so desires to vote even though he called the vote.
>
> Gary
>
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023, 06:33 Milamber <mi...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I count 2 +1 from PMC member. The vote can passes because no veto (-1
>> vote) and perhaps this vote is on under the lazy consensus way?
>>
>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>>
>> "Votes on procedural issues follow the common format of majority rule
>> unless otherwise stated. That is, if there are more favourable votes
>> than unfavourable ones, the issue is considered to have passed --
>> regardless of the number of votes in each category. (If the number of
>> votes seems too small to be representative of a community consensus, the
>> issue is typically not pursued. However, see the description of lazy
>> consensus for a modifying factor.)"
>>
>>
>> Milamber
>>
>> On 29/03/2023 10:03, Mukul Gandhi wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> > We need more Xalan pmc reviews, to have this RC declared to be
>> approved.
>> >
>> > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 6:22 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> Thank you Mukul for this RC.
>> >>
>> >> +1
>> >>
>> >> - Reviewing src zip: ASC, SHA files OK.
>> >> - Building runtime with 'chmod +x ./build.sh && ./build.sh clean
>> fulldist' OK.
>> >> - Following the README, there is confusion because the unzipped src
>> zip creates a `xalan-test` folder as a child folder but the README
>> describes it as a sibling folder. Does this skew the tests or cause issues?
>> >> - TODOs later:
>> >> -- Fix Javadoc errors
>> >> -- Test output should be quieter in non-debug mode: No need to tell me
>> all the test files that PASS, I have no idea if I am missing any failure
>> output without tediously reviewing ALL console output.
>> >>
>> >> Using:
>> >>
>> >> ant -version
>> >> Apache Ant(TM) version 1.10.13 compiled on January 4 2023
>> >>
>> >> java -version
>> >> openjdk version "1.8.0_362"
>> >> OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_362-bre_2023_01_22_03_32-b00)
>> >> OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.362-b00, mixed mode)
>> >>
>> >> uname -a
>> >> Darwin *** 22.3.0 Darwin Kernel Version 22.3.0: Mon Jan 30 20:42:11
>> PST 2023; root:xnu-8792.81.3~2/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64
>> >>
>> >> Gary
>> >
>>
>>
>
Xalan-test brainstorming noise
Posted by Joseph Kessselman <ke...@alum.mit.edu>.
Just documenting my current thoughts. Not sure I'm actually on the dev
list again/still, but it's the right place for this rather than
inflicting it on j-users.
I'm pondering the cleanest way to move the currently-separate jira tests
into the main test suite. For example, the date formatting bug could be
run, as some of the existing tests are, by transforming into a
stringbuffer and checking that the zone offset is appropriately
formatted; I think we could use
System.setProperty("user.timezone","IST") to switch into the
fractional-hour offset mode to provoke the bug case.
But to really do this cleanly I'm doing some reverse-engineering of the
test framework, trying to recall the exact differences between the
various Testlet/Datalet Drivers. As the tests/bugzilla directory shows,
we did have ways of setting up a test directory with both simple
transform tests and explicit java Testlets (though the
BugzillaTestletDriver is a bit different from our usual setup and I need
to make sure I understand how.)
Note that tests/bugzilla is where we put tests for reported errors that
we were still working on, which is why some of them are stylesheet and
input which provoke the issue but don't have either a gold file or a
Testlet to execute and evaluate them.
Jira has replaced Bugzilla, so arguably we should now have an equivalent
tests/jira directory that demonstrates known unresolved issues, and they
should be moved into a directory that's part of the "live" regression
suite. This would require some updating of build.xml.
Yeah, I'm getting distracted by minutiae. I'd like to improve our
undersanding/doc for xalan-test so it's easier to deal with going
forward. But as a quick hack, I could just put jira-issue tests into
tests/bugzilla while working on them, and perhaps set up a
tests/jira-fixed which they'd be moved to when repaired, and
sanity-check whether they can be moved into the *right* test sets later.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@xalan.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@xalan.apache.org
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org>.
Hi all,
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 4:22 PM Milamber <mi...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On vote call, Mukul have add this line at the end of mail:
>
> Great work everyone. Here's my +1 for this RC.
>
>
> So two +1 for this vote (you and Mukul)
I've already mentioned +1 as my vote, at the start of this vote thread.
It seems to me that, this vote could now be declared as pass. We could
also, count Joseph Kesselman's support of this RC as +1 vote.
--
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
Ah! Please accept my apologies!
Gary
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023, 06:52 Milamber <mi...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On vote call, Mukul have add this line at the end of mail:
>
> Great work everyone. Here's my +1 for this RC.
>
>
> So two +1 for this vote (you and Mukul)
>
> Milamber
>
> On 29/03/2023 10:37, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> I count one +1 vote (from me). Mukul still has to officially reply with a
> +1 if he so desires to vote even though he called the vote.
>
> Gary
>
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023, 06:33 Milamber <mi...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I count 2 +1 from PMC member. The vote can passes because no veto (-1
>> vote) and perhaps this vote is on under the lazy consensus way?
>>
>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>>
>> "Votes on procedural issues follow the common format of majority rule
>> unless otherwise stated. That is, if there are more favourable votes
>> than unfavourable ones, the issue is considered to have passed --
>> regardless of the number of votes in each category. (If the number of
>> votes seems too small to be representative of a community consensus, the
>> issue is typically not pursued. However, see the description of lazy
>> consensus for a modifying factor.)"
>>
>>
>> Milamber
>>
>> On 29/03/2023 10:03, Mukul Gandhi wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> > We need more Xalan pmc reviews, to have this RC declared to be
>> approved.
>> >
>> > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 6:22 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> Thank you Mukul for this RC.
>> >>
>> >> +1
>> >>
>> >> - Reviewing src zip: ASC, SHA files OK.
>> >> - Building runtime with 'chmod +x ./build.sh && ./build.sh clean
>> fulldist' OK.
>> >> - Following the README, there is confusion because the unzipped src
>> zip creates a `xalan-test` folder as a child folder but the README
>> describes it as a sibling folder. Does this skew the tests or cause issues?
>> >> - TODOs later:
>> >> -- Fix Javadoc errors
>> >> -- Test output should be quieter in non-debug mode: No need to tell me
>> all the test files that PASS, I have no idea if I am missing any failure
>> output without tediously reviewing ALL console output.
>> >>
>> >> Using:
>> >>
>> >> ant -version
>> >> Apache Ant(TM) version 1.10.13 compiled on January 4 2023
>> >>
>> >> java -version
>> >> openjdk version "1.8.0_362"
>> >> OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_362-bre_2023_01_22_03_32-b00)
>> >> OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.362-b00, mixed mode)
>> >>
>> >> uname -a
>> >> Darwin *** 22.3.0 Darwin Kernel Version 22.3.0: Mon Jan 30 20:42:11
>> PST 2023; root:xnu-8792.81.3~2/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64
>> >>
>> >> Gary
>> >
>>
>>
>
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org>.
Hi all,
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 4:22 PM Milamber <mi...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On vote call, Mukul have add this line at the end of mail:
>
> Great work everyone. Here's my +1 for this RC.
>
>
> So two +1 for this vote (you and Mukul)
I've already mentioned +1 as my vote, at the start of this vote thread.
It seems to me that, this vote could now be declared as pass. We could
also, count Joseph Kesselman's support of this RC as +1 vote.
--
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@xalan.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@xalan.apache.org
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Milamber <mi...@apache.org>.
Hi,
On vote call, Mukul have add this line at the end of mail:
> Great work everyone. Here's my +1 for this RC.
So two +1 for this vote (you and Mukul)
Milamber
On 29/03/2023 10:37, Gary Gregory wrote:
> I count one +1 vote (from me). Mukul still has to officially reply
> with a +1 if he so desires to vote even though he called the vote.
>
> Gary
>
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023, 06:33 Milamber <milamber@apache.org
> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I count 2 +1 from PMC member. The vote can passes because no veto (-1
> vote) and perhaps this vote is on under the lazy consensus way?
>
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>
> "Votes on procedural issues follow the common format of majority rule
> unless otherwise stated. That is, if there are more favourable votes
> than unfavourable ones, the issue is considered to have passed --
> regardless of the number of votes in each category. (If the number of
> votes seems too small to be representative of a community
> consensus, the
> issue is typically not pursued. However, see the description of lazy
> consensus for a modifying factor.)"
>
>
> Milamber
>
> On 29/03/2023 10:03, Mukul Gandhi wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > We need more Xalan pmc reviews, to have this RC declared to
> be approved.
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 6:22 PM Gary Gregory
> <garydgregory@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >> Thank you Mukul for this RC.
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> - Reviewing src zip: ASC, SHA files OK.
> >> - Building runtime with 'chmod +x ./build.sh && ./build.sh
> clean fulldist' OK.
> >> - Following the README, there is confusion because the unzipped
> src zip creates a `xalan-test` folder as a child folder but the
> README describes it as a sibling folder. Does this skew the tests
> or cause issues?
> >> - TODOs later:
> >> -- Fix Javadoc errors
> >> -- Test output should be quieter in non-debug mode: No need to
> tell me all the test files that PASS, I have no idea if I am
> missing any failure output without tediously reviewing ALL console
> output.
> >>
> >> Using:
> >>
> >> ant -version
> >> Apache Ant(TM) version 1.10.13 compiled on January 4 2023
> >>
> >> java -version
> >> openjdk version "1.8.0_362"
> >> OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build
> 1.8.0_362-bre_2023_01_22_03_32-b00)
> >> OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.362-b00, mixed mode)
> >>
> >> uname -a
> >> Darwin *** 22.3.0 Darwin Kernel Version 22.3.0: Mon Jan 30
> 20:42:11 PST 2023; root:xnu-8792.81.3~2/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64
> >>
> >> Gary
> >
>
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Milamber <mi...@apache.org>.
Hi,
On vote call, Mukul have add this line at the end of mail:
> Great work everyone. Here's my +1 for this RC.
So two +1 for this vote (you and Mukul)
Milamber
On 29/03/2023 10:37, Gary Gregory wrote:
> I count one +1 vote (from me). Mukul still has to officially reply
> with a +1 if he so desires to vote even though he called the vote.
>
> Gary
>
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023, 06:33 Milamber <milamber@apache.org
> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I count 2 +1 from PMC member. The vote can passes because no veto (-1
> vote) and perhaps this vote is on under the lazy consensus way?
>
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>
> "Votes on procedural issues follow the common format of majority rule
> unless otherwise stated. That is, if there are more favourable votes
> than unfavourable ones, the issue is considered to have passed --
> regardless of the number of votes in each category. (If the number of
> votes seems too small to be representative of a community
> consensus, the
> issue is typically not pursued. However, see the description of lazy
> consensus for a modifying factor.)"
>
>
> Milamber
>
> On 29/03/2023 10:03, Mukul Gandhi wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > We need more Xalan pmc reviews, to have this RC declared to
> be approved.
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 6:22 PM Gary Gregory
> <garydgregory@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >> Thank you Mukul for this RC.
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> - Reviewing src zip: ASC, SHA files OK.
> >> - Building runtime with 'chmod +x ./build.sh && ./build.sh
> clean fulldist' OK.
> >> - Following the README, there is confusion because the unzipped
> src zip creates a `xalan-test` folder as a child folder but the
> README describes it as a sibling folder. Does this skew the tests
> or cause issues?
> >> - TODOs later:
> >> -- Fix Javadoc errors
> >> -- Test output should be quieter in non-debug mode: No need to
> tell me all the test files that PASS, I have no idea if I am
> missing any failure output without tediously reviewing ALL console
> output.
> >>
> >> Using:
> >>
> >> ant -version
> >> Apache Ant(TM) version 1.10.13 compiled on January 4 2023
> >>
> >> java -version
> >> openjdk version "1.8.0_362"
> >> OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build
> 1.8.0_362-bre_2023_01_22_03_32-b00)
> >> OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.362-b00, mixed mode)
> >>
> >> uname -a
> >> Darwin *** 22.3.0 Darwin Kernel Version 22.3.0: Mon Jan 30
> 20:42:11 PST 2023; root:xnu-8792.81.3~2/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64
> >>
> >> Gary
> >
>
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
I count one +1 vote (from me). Mukul still has to officially reply with a
+1 if he so desires to vote even though he called the vote.
Gary
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023, 06:33 Milamber <mi...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I count 2 +1 from PMC member. The vote can passes because no veto (-1
> vote) and perhaps this vote is on under the lazy consensus way?
>
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>
> "Votes on procedural issues follow the common format of majority rule
> unless otherwise stated. That is, if there are more favourable votes
> than unfavourable ones, the issue is considered to have passed --
> regardless of the number of votes in each category. (If the number of
> votes seems too small to be representative of a community consensus, the
> issue is typically not pursued. However, see the description of lazy
> consensus for a modifying factor.)"
>
>
> Milamber
>
> On 29/03/2023 10:03, Mukul Gandhi wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > We need more Xalan pmc reviews, to have this RC declared to be
> approved.
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 6:22 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> Thank you Mukul for this RC.
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> - Reviewing src zip: ASC, SHA files OK.
> >> - Building runtime with 'chmod +x ./build.sh && ./build.sh clean
> fulldist' OK.
> >> - Following the README, there is confusion because the unzipped src zip
> creates a `xalan-test` folder as a child folder but the README describes it
> as a sibling folder. Does this skew the tests or cause issues?
> >> - TODOs later:
> >> -- Fix Javadoc errors
> >> -- Test output should be quieter in non-debug mode: No need to tell me
> all the test files that PASS, I have no idea if I am missing any failure
> output without tediously reviewing ALL console output.
> >>
> >> Using:
> >>
> >> ant -version
> >> Apache Ant(TM) version 1.10.13 compiled on January 4 2023
> >>
> >> java -version
> >> openjdk version "1.8.0_362"
> >> OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_362-bre_2023_01_22_03_32-b00)
> >> OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.362-b00, mixed mode)
> >>
> >> uname -a
> >> Darwin *** 22.3.0 Darwin Kernel Version 22.3.0: Mon Jan 30 20:42:11 PST
> 2023; root:xnu-8792.81.3~2/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64
> >>
> >> Gary
> >
>
>
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
This cannot be a lazy vote IMO.
Gary
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023, 06:33 Milamber <mi...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I count 2 +1 from PMC member. The vote can passes because no veto (-1
> vote) and perhaps this vote is on under the lazy consensus way?
>
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>
> "Votes on procedural issues follow the common format of majority rule
> unless otherwise stated. That is, if there are more favourable votes
> than unfavourable ones, the issue is considered to have passed --
> regardless of the number of votes in each category. (If the number of
> votes seems too small to be representative of a community consensus, the
> issue is typically not pursued. However, see the description of lazy
> consensus for a modifying factor.)"
>
>
> Milamber
>
> On 29/03/2023 10:03, Mukul Gandhi wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > We need more Xalan pmc reviews, to have this RC declared to be
> approved.
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 6:22 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> Thank you Mukul for this RC.
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> - Reviewing src zip: ASC, SHA files OK.
> >> - Building runtime with 'chmod +x ./build.sh && ./build.sh clean
> fulldist' OK.
> >> - Following the README, there is confusion because the unzipped src zip
> creates a `xalan-test` folder as a child folder but the README describes it
> as a sibling folder. Does this skew the tests or cause issues?
> >> - TODOs later:
> >> -- Fix Javadoc errors
> >> -- Test output should be quieter in non-debug mode: No need to tell me
> all the test files that PASS, I have no idea if I am missing any failure
> output without tediously reviewing ALL console output.
> >>
> >> Using:
> >>
> >> ant -version
> >> Apache Ant(TM) version 1.10.13 compiled on January 4 2023
> >>
> >> java -version
> >> openjdk version "1.8.0_362"
> >> OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_362-bre_2023_01_22_03_32-b00)
> >> OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.362-b00, mixed mode)
> >>
> >> uname -a
> >> Darwin *** 22.3.0 Darwin Kernel Version 22.3.0: Mon Jan 30 20:42:11 PST
> 2023; root:xnu-8792.81.3~2/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64
> >>
> >> Gary
> >
>
>
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
I count one +1 vote (from me). Mukul still has to officially reply with a
+1 if he so desires to vote even though he called the vote.
Gary
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023, 06:33 Milamber <mi...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I count 2 +1 from PMC member. The vote can passes because no veto (-1
> vote) and perhaps this vote is on under the lazy consensus way?
>
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>
> "Votes on procedural issues follow the common format of majority rule
> unless otherwise stated. That is, if there are more favourable votes
> than unfavourable ones, the issue is considered to have passed --
> regardless of the number of votes in each category. (If the number of
> votes seems too small to be representative of a community consensus, the
> issue is typically not pursued. However, see the description of lazy
> consensus for a modifying factor.)"
>
>
> Milamber
>
> On 29/03/2023 10:03, Mukul Gandhi wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > We need more Xalan pmc reviews, to have this RC declared to be
> approved.
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 6:22 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> Thank you Mukul for this RC.
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> - Reviewing src zip: ASC, SHA files OK.
> >> - Building runtime with 'chmod +x ./build.sh && ./build.sh clean
> fulldist' OK.
> >> - Following the README, there is confusion because the unzipped src zip
> creates a `xalan-test` folder as a child folder but the README describes it
> as a sibling folder. Does this skew the tests or cause issues?
> >> - TODOs later:
> >> -- Fix Javadoc errors
> >> -- Test output should be quieter in non-debug mode: No need to tell me
> all the test files that PASS, I have no idea if I am missing any failure
> output without tediously reviewing ALL console output.
> >>
> >> Using:
> >>
> >> ant -version
> >> Apache Ant(TM) version 1.10.13 compiled on January 4 2023
> >>
> >> java -version
> >> openjdk version "1.8.0_362"
> >> OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_362-bre_2023_01_22_03_32-b00)
> >> OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.362-b00, mixed mode)
> >>
> >> uname -a
> >> Darwin *** 22.3.0 Darwin Kernel Version 22.3.0: Mon Jan 30 20:42:11 PST
> 2023; root:xnu-8792.81.3~2/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64
> >>
> >> Gary
> >
>
>
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
This cannot be a lazy vote IMO.
Gary
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023, 06:33 Milamber <mi...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I count 2 +1 from PMC member. The vote can passes because no veto (-1
> vote) and perhaps this vote is on under the lazy consensus way?
>
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>
> "Votes on procedural issues follow the common format of majority rule
> unless otherwise stated. That is, if there are more favourable votes
> than unfavourable ones, the issue is considered to have passed --
> regardless of the number of votes in each category. (If the number of
> votes seems too small to be representative of a community consensus, the
> issue is typically not pursued. However, see the description of lazy
> consensus for a modifying factor.)"
>
>
> Milamber
>
> On 29/03/2023 10:03, Mukul Gandhi wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > We need more Xalan pmc reviews, to have this RC declared to be
> approved.
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 6:22 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> Thank you Mukul for this RC.
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> - Reviewing src zip: ASC, SHA files OK.
> >> - Building runtime with 'chmod +x ./build.sh && ./build.sh clean
> fulldist' OK.
> >> - Following the README, there is confusion because the unzipped src zip
> creates a `xalan-test` folder as a child folder but the README describes it
> as a sibling folder. Does this skew the tests or cause issues?
> >> - TODOs later:
> >> -- Fix Javadoc errors
> >> -- Test output should be quieter in non-debug mode: No need to tell me
> all the test files that PASS, I have no idea if I am missing any failure
> output without tediously reviewing ALL console output.
> >>
> >> Using:
> >>
> >> ant -version
> >> Apache Ant(TM) version 1.10.13 compiled on January 4 2023
> >>
> >> java -version
> >> openjdk version "1.8.0_362"
> >> OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_362-bre_2023_01_22_03_32-b00)
> >> OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.362-b00, mixed mode)
> >>
> >> uname -a
> >> Darwin *** 22.3.0 Darwin Kernel Version 22.3.0: Mon Jan 30 20:42:11 PST
> 2023; root:xnu-8792.81.3~2/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64
> >>
> >> Gary
> >
>
>
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Milamber <mi...@apache.org>.
Hi,
I count 2 +1 from PMC member. The vote can passes because no veto (-1
vote) and perhaps this vote is on under the lazy consensus way?
https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
"Votes on procedural issues follow the common format of majority rule
unless otherwise stated. That is, if there are more favourable votes
than unfavourable ones, the issue is considered to have passed --
regardless of the number of votes in each category. (If the number of
votes seems too small to be representative of a community consensus, the
issue is typically not pursued. However, see the description of lazy
consensus for a modifying factor.)"
Milamber
On 29/03/2023 10:03, Mukul Gandhi wrote:
> Hi all,
> We need more Xalan pmc reviews, to have this RC declared to be approved.
>
> On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 6:22 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Thank you Mukul for this RC.
>>
>> +1
>>
>> - Reviewing src zip: ASC, SHA files OK.
>> - Building runtime with 'chmod +x ./build.sh && ./build.sh clean fulldist' OK.
>> - Following the README, there is confusion because the unzipped src zip creates a `xalan-test` folder as a child folder but the README describes it as a sibling folder. Does this skew the tests or cause issues?
>> - TODOs later:
>> -- Fix Javadoc errors
>> -- Test output should be quieter in non-debug mode: No need to tell me all the test files that PASS, I have no idea if I am missing any failure output without tediously reviewing ALL console output.
>>
>> Using:
>>
>> ant -version
>> Apache Ant(TM) version 1.10.13 compiled on January 4 2023
>>
>> java -version
>> openjdk version "1.8.0_362"
>> OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_362-bre_2023_01_22_03_32-b00)
>> OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.362-b00, mixed mode)
>>
>> uname -a
>> Darwin *** 22.3.0 Darwin Kernel Version 22.3.0: Mon Jan 30 20:42:11 PST 2023; root:xnu-8792.81.3~2/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64
>>
>> Gary
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@xalan.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@xalan.apache.org
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Milamber <mi...@apache.org>.
Hi,
I count 2 +1 from PMC member. The vote can passes because no veto (-1
vote) and perhaps this vote is on under the lazy consensus way?
https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
"Votes on procedural issues follow the common format of majority rule
unless otherwise stated. That is, if there are more favourable votes
than unfavourable ones, the issue is considered to have passed --
regardless of the number of votes in each category. (If the number of
votes seems too small to be representative of a community consensus, the
issue is typically not pursued. However, see the description of lazy
consensus for a modifying factor.)"
Milamber
On 29/03/2023 10:03, Mukul Gandhi wrote:
> Hi all,
> We need more Xalan pmc reviews, to have this RC declared to be approved.
>
> On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 6:22 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Thank you Mukul for this RC.
>>
>> +1
>>
>> - Reviewing src zip: ASC, SHA files OK.
>> - Building runtime with 'chmod +x ./build.sh && ./build.sh clean fulldist' OK.
>> - Following the README, there is confusion because the unzipped src zip creates a `xalan-test` folder as a child folder but the README describes it as a sibling folder. Does this skew the tests or cause issues?
>> - TODOs later:
>> -- Fix Javadoc errors
>> -- Test output should be quieter in non-debug mode: No need to tell me all the test files that PASS, I have no idea if I am missing any failure output without tediously reviewing ALL console output.
>>
>> Using:
>>
>> ant -version
>> Apache Ant(TM) version 1.10.13 compiled on January 4 2023
>>
>> java -version
>> openjdk version "1.8.0_362"
>> OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_362-bre_2023_01_22_03_32-b00)
>> OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.362-b00, mixed mode)
>>
>> uname -a
>> Darwin *** 22.3.0 Darwin Kernel Version 22.3.0: Mon Jan 30 20:42:11 PST 2023; root:xnu-8792.81.3~2/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64
>>
>> Gary
>
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org>.
Hi all,
We need more Xalan pmc reviews, to have this RC declared to be approved.
On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 6:22 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thank you Mukul for this RC.
>
> +1
>
> - Reviewing src zip: ASC, SHA files OK.
> - Building runtime with 'chmod +x ./build.sh && ./build.sh clean fulldist' OK.
> - Following the README, there is confusion because the unzipped src zip creates a `xalan-test` folder as a child folder but the README describes it as a sibling folder. Does this skew the tests or cause issues?
> - TODOs later:
> -- Fix Javadoc errors
> -- Test output should be quieter in non-debug mode: No need to tell me all the test files that PASS, I have no idea if I am missing any failure output without tediously reviewing ALL console output.
>
> Using:
>
> ant -version
> Apache Ant(TM) version 1.10.13 compiled on January 4 2023
>
> java -version
> openjdk version "1.8.0_362"
> OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_362-bre_2023_01_22_03_32-b00)
> OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.362-b00, mixed mode)
>
> uname -a
> Darwin *** 22.3.0 Darwin Kernel Version 22.3.0: Mon Jan 30 20:42:11 PST 2023; root:xnu-8792.81.3~2/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64
>
> Gary
--
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@xalan.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@xalan.apache.org
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org>.
Hi all,
We need more Xalan pmc reviews, to have this RC declared to be approved.
On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 6:22 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thank you Mukul for this RC.
>
> +1
>
> - Reviewing src zip: ASC, SHA files OK.
> - Building runtime with 'chmod +x ./build.sh && ./build.sh clean fulldist' OK.
> - Following the README, there is confusion because the unzipped src zip creates a `xalan-test` folder as a child folder but the README describes it as a sibling folder. Does this skew the tests or cause issues?
> - TODOs later:
> -- Fix Javadoc errors
> -- Test output should be quieter in non-debug mode: No need to tell me all the test files that PASS, I have no idea if I am missing any failure output without tediously reviewing ALL console output.
>
> Using:
>
> ant -version
> Apache Ant(TM) version 1.10.13 compiled on January 4 2023
>
> java -version
> openjdk version "1.8.0_362"
> OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_362-bre_2023_01_22_03_32-b00)
> OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.362-b00, mixed mode)
>
> uname -a
> Darwin *** 22.3.0 Darwin Kernel Version 22.3.0: Mon Jan 30 20:42:11 PST 2023; root:xnu-8792.81.3~2/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64
>
> Gary
--
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org>.
Hi Gary,
On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 6:22 PM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> - Following the README, there is confusion because the unzipped src zip creates a `xalan-test` folder as a child folder but the README describes it as a sibling folder. Does this skew the tests or cause issues?
The XalanJ READMEfile, mentions following with respect to this point,
"For XalanJ source distribution users, xalan-test folder is located at
the root of the XalanJ source distribution folder (i.e, parallel to
folders "src", "tools" etc within the main XalanJ
codebase folder location), from where XalanJ source distribution users
may run XalanJ tests, by using the "build" script located at this
folder location"
I really meant that, the XalanJ source distribution users, need to go
within the xalan-test folder and use the build scripts located there,
to run XalanJ tests. I apologize that, I might not have written the
best possible English language grammar to describe these points.
--
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
Thank you Mukul for this RC.
+1
- Reviewing src zip: ASC, SHA files OK.
- Building runtime with 'chmod +x ./build.sh && ./build.sh clean fulldist'
OK.
- Following the README, there is confusion because the unzipped src zip
creates a `xalan-test` folder as a child folder but the README describes it
as a sibling folder. Does this skew the tests or cause issues?
- TODOs later:
-- Fix Javadoc errors
-- Test output should be quieter in non-debug mode: No need to tell me all
the test files that PASS, I have no idea if I am missing any failure output
without tediously reviewing ALL console output.
Using:
ant -version
Apache Ant(TM) version 1.10.13 compiled on January 4 2023
java -version
openjdk version "1.8.0_362"
OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_362-bre_2023_01_22_03_32-b00)
OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.362-b00, mixed mode)
uname -a
Darwin *** 22.3.0 Darwin Kernel Version 22.3.0: Mon Jan 30 20:42:11 PST
2023; root:xnu-8792.81.3~2/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64
Gary
On Sat, Mar 25, 2023 at 11:32 AM Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
> I've published the new RC for XalanJ 2.7.3 release (located at
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/xalan/j/2.7.3/RC10/). This RC,
> uses Apache Commons BCEL 6.7.0, and also provides means to build and
> test XalanJ from the source distribution.
>
> Since the previous XalanJ RC, this RC provides following improvements,
> 1) Few improvements to the XalanJ implementation and tests build
> scripts, based on feedback from XalanJ list members.
> 2) New linux build scripts, for XalanJ implementation and tests builds.
> 3) Implementation of few new XalanJ tests, for the jira issues solved
> for XalanJ 2.7.3.
> 4) Upgrade to the latest jtidy library (that parses XalanJ tests
> output HTML documents).
> 5) Suppression of few error messages, during XalanJ tests build, whose
> context was not clear.
>
> The apache git tags corresponding to this RC, are following (these
> have been committed as well),
> xalan-java repos (branch xalan-j_2_7_1_maint) : xalan-j_2_7_3-rc10
> xalan-test repos (branch master) : xalan-j_2_7_3-rc10
>
> I've verified the working of this RC, both on windows and linux
> platforms, and necessary build tests pass as discussed during review
> of XalanJ RC9.
>
> The key that can be used, to verify this RC is located within the
> file, at https://dlcdn.apache.org/xalan/xalan-j/KEYS.
>
> The XalanJ readme file, has been updated here
>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=xalan-java.git;a=blob_plain;f=README;hb=refs/heads/xalan-j_2_7_1_maint
> ,
> describing the XalanJ build and tests process.
>
> Kindly review and vote, for this XalanJ 2.7.3 RC.
>
> Great work everyone. Here's my +1 for this RC.
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Mukul Gandhi
>
Re: [request to review, and vote] XalanJ 2.7.3 release candidate RC10
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
Thank you Mukul for this RC.
+1
- Reviewing src zip: ASC, SHA files OK.
- Building runtime with 'chmod +x ./build.sh && ./build.sh clean fulldist'
OK.
- Following the README, there is confusion because the unzipped src zip
creates a `xalan-test` folder as a child folder but the README describes it
as a sibling folder. Does this skew the tests or cause issues?
- TODOs later:
-- Fix Javadoc errors
-- Test output should be quieter in non-debug mode: No need to tell me all
the test files that PASS, I have no idea if I am missing any failure output
without tediously reviewing ALL console output.
Using:
ant -version
Apache Ant(TM) version 1.10.13 compiled on January 4 2023
java -version
openjdk version "1.8.0_362"
OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_362-bre_2023_01_22_03_32-b00)
OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.362-b00, mixed mode)
uname -a
Darwin *** 22.3.0 Darwin Kernel Version 22.3.0: Mon Jan 30 20:42:11 PST
2023; root:xnu-8792.81.3~2/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64
Gary
On Sat, Mar 25, 2023 at 11:32 AM Mukul Gandhi <mu...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
> I've published the new RC for XalanJ 2.7.3 release (located at
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/xalan/j/2.7.3/RC10/). This RC,
> uses Apache Commons BCEL 6.7.0, and also provides means to build and
> test XalanJ from the source distribution.
>
> Since the previous XalanJ RC, this RC provides following improvements,
> 1) Few improvements to the XalanJ implementation and tests build
> scripts, based on feedback from XalanJ list members.
> 2) New linux build scripts, for XalanJ implementation and tests builds.
> 3) Implementation of few new XalanJ tests, for the jira issues solved
> for XalanJ 2.7.3.
> 4) Upgrade to the latest jtidy library (that parses XalanJ tests
> output HTML documents).
> 5) Suppression of few error messages, during XalanJ tests build, whose
> context was not clear.
>
> The apache git tags corresponding to this RC, are following (these
> have been committed as well),
> xalan-java repos (branch xalan-j_2_7_1_maint) : xalan-j_2_7_3-rc10
> xalan-test repos (branch master) : xalan-j_2_7_3-rc10
>
> I've verified the working of this RC, both on windows and linux
> platforms, and necessary build tests pass as discussed during review
> of XalanJ RC9.
>
> The key that can be used, to verify this RC is located within the
> file, at https://dlcdn.apache.org/xalan/xalan-j/KEYS.
>
> The XalanJ readme file, has been updated here
>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=xalan-java.git;a=blob_plain;f=README;hb=refs/heads/xalan-j_2_7_1_maint
> ,
> describing the XalanJ build and tests process.
>
> Kindly review and vote, for this XalanJ 2.7.3 RC.
>
> Great work everyone. Here's my +1 for this RC.
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Mukul Gandhi
>