Fwd: [RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache Tika 1.28.2 Candidate #2

[Tim Allison <ta...@apache.org>]

Should have included @user

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Tim Allison <ta...@apache.org>
Date: Mon, May 2, 2022 at 9:40 AM
Subject: [RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache Tika 1.28.2 Candidate #2
To: <de...@tika.apache.org> <de...@tika.apache.org>


The vote has passed with 3 +1s and no -1s.

Tim Allison
Tilman Hausherr
Oleg Tikhonov

I'll make the release shortly.

On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 7:15 AM Tim Allison <ta...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Thank you, Tilman!
>
> I'll give it a few more hours in case anyone wants to -1 it.
>
> On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 6:20 AM Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de> wrote:
> >
> > 👋 Go with what we have
> > Tilman
> >
> >
> >
> > --- Original-Nachricht ---
> > Von: Tim Allison
> > Betreff: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Tika 1.28.2 Candidate #2
> > Datum: 02. Mai 2022, 12:15
> > An: <de...@tika.apache.org>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I confirmed my memory of TikaServerIntegrationTest. The difference is
> > that in 1.x, we were still using threads to start the server and then
> > hoping that<http://thread.interrupt> () actually shut the process down in a
> > reasonable amount of time. In 2.x, we're starting processes and then
> > force quitting those after each test. In my experience, this got rid
> > of the flaky tests in 2.x
> >
> > We didn't change any of the underlying server logic in 1.x. This is a
> > problem of flaky tests.
> >
> > Given that we have the 1.x branch through September, I'll convert the
> > thread based tests to process based tests shortly. The question is:
> > should we roll an rc3 or go with what we have.
> >
> > Thank you, all.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Tim
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 9:10 AM Tim Allison <tallison@apache.org
> > <ma...@apache.org> > wrote:
> > >
> > > That's exactly my understanding as well. That test is not flaky in 2x
> > > because of modifications I made to the integration tests in 2x.
> > >
> > > In 2x, the Solr tests can be flaky, and there's an open issue for
> > > that. I don't like flaky tests. Sorry.
> > >
> > > On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 6:28 AM Tilman Hausherr <THausherr@t-online.de
> > <ma...@t-online.de> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Now I had successful builds with jdk11 and jdk18. I think this is more
> > a
> > > > problem with the test than with the software. I remember when I started
> > > > with tika I wanted to make it possible to have tika1 and 2 work in
> > > > parallel and never managed to do it and then moved on to other things.
> > > > Something about unreliability of the server starting and stopping.
> > > >
> > > > Tilman
> > > >
> > > > Am 30.04.2022 um 11:29 schrieb Tilman Hausherr:
> > > > > [ERROR] Tests run: 12, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 2, Time
> > > > > elapsed: 102.543 s <<< FAILURE! - in
> > > > ><http://org.apache.tika.server.TikaServerIntegrationTest>
> > > > > [ERROR]
> > > > >
> > <http://org.apache.tika.server.TikaServerIntegrationTest.testSameServerIdAfterOOM>
> > > > > Time elapsed: 5.694 s <<< ERROR!
> > > > ><http://java.lang.IllegalStateException> : Not a JSON Object: null
> > > > > at
> > > > >
> > <http://org.apache.tika.server.TikaServerIntegrationTest.getServerId(TikaServerIntegrationTest.java:280>
> > )
> > > > >
> > > > > at
> > > > >
> > <http://org.apache.tika.server.TikaServerIntegrationTest.testSameServerIdAfterOOM(TikaServerIntegrationTest.java:208>
> > )
> > > > >
> > > > > W10, jdk11, maven 3.8.5
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >