You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@commons.apache.org by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> on 2014/12/23 18:32:48 UTC
[VOTE] Release pool 2.3 based on RC1
Tag:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/pool/tags/POOL_2_3_RC1/
Release:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/
Maven:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1070
Site:
http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/pool/pool-2.3-rc1/
Release notes:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/RELEASE-NOTES.txt
Votes, please. This vote will close in 72 hours (26-Dec 17:30 GMT)
[ ] +1 Release this
[ ] +0 Ok, but...
[ ] -0 Really should fix...
[ ] -1 We should not release this RC
Thanks!
Phil
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
[CANCELLED] [VOTE] Release pool 2.3 based on RC1
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
There is a unit test that fails on Windows. This needs to be fixed.
Phil
On 12/23/14 10:32 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> Tag:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/pool/tags/POOL_2_3_RC1/
>
> Release:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/
>
> Maven:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1070
>
> Site:
> http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/pool/pool-2.3-rc1/
>
> Release notes:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/RELEASE-NOTES.txt
>
> Votes, please. This vote will close in 72 hours (26-Dec 17:30 GMT)
>
> [ ] +1 Release this
> [ ] +0 Ok, but...
> [ ] -0 Really should fix...
> [ ] -1 We should not release this RC
>
> Thanks!
>
> Phil
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release pool 2.3 based on RC1
Posted by Thomas Neidhart <th...@gmail.com>.
On 12/23/2014 06:32 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> Tag:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/pool/tags/POOL_2_3_RC1/
>
> Release:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/
>
> Maven:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1070
>
> Site:
> http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/pool/pool-2.3-rc1/
>
> Release notes:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/RELEASE-NOTES.txt
>
> Votes, please. This vote will close in 72 hours (26-Dec 17:30 GMT)
>
[x] +1 Release this
Artifacts look good, the clirr error is explained in the release notes.
Tested with:
OpenJDK Server VM (build 24.65-b04, mixed mode)
Thomas
> [ ] +0 Ok, but...
> [ ] -0 Really should fix...
> [ ] -1 We should not release this RC
>
> Thanks!
>
> Phil
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release pool 2.3 based on RC1
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
On 12/24/14 4:37 AM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> I observed 2 test failures on Windows with Java 6, 7 and 8 that didn't
> happen with the previous version:
>
> Tests run: 58, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 156.641
> sec <<< FAILURE! - in
> org.apache.commons.pool2.impl.TestGenericKeyedObjectPool
> testClientWaitStats(org.apache.commons.pool2.impl.TestGenericKeyedObjectPool)
> Time elapsed: 0.11 sec <<< FAILURE!
> java.lang.AssertionError: null
> at org.junit.Assert.fail(Assert.java:86)
> at org.junit.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:41)
> at org.junit.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:52)
> at
> org.apache.commons.pool2.impl.TestGenericKeyedObjectPool.testClientWaitStats(TestGenericKeyedObjectPool.java:1583)
>
>
> Tests run: 70, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 73.891
> sec <<< FAILURE! - in org.apache.commons.pool2.impl.TestGenericObjectPool
> testBorrowObjectFairness(org.apache.commons.pool2.impl.TestGenericObjectPool)
> Time elapsed: 2.437 sec <<< FAILURE!
> java.lang.AssertionError: Thread 36 failed: java.lang.Throwable:
> Expected: 36 found: 37
> at org.junit.Assert.fail(Assert.java:88)
> at
> org.apache.commons.pool2.impl.TestGenericObjectPool.testBorrowObjectFairness(TestGenericObjectPool.java:2034)
Thanks for testing and reporting this. The failing test is new,
verifying the fix for POOL-289. The test is too sensitive for the
Windows system clock. It basically depends on the assumption that
if a thread does sleep(100) then the difference between pre- post-
system times is at least 100 ms. I will fix it and roll another RC
(unless someone else with access to a Windows box wants to take a
stab at it).
Phil
>
>
> The tests worked fine on Debian with OpenJDK 6 & 7 .
>
> Emmanuel Bourg
>
>
> Le 23/12/2014 18:32, Phil Steitz a écrit :
>> Tag:
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/pool/tags/POOL_2_3_RC1/
>>
>> Release:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/
>>
>> Maven:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1070
>>
>> Site:
>> http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/pool/pool-2.3-rc1/
>>
>> Release notes:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/RELEASE-NOTES.txt
>>
>> Votes, please. This vote will close in 72 hours (26-Dec 17:30 GMT)
>>
>> [ ] +1 Release this
>> [ ] +0 Ok, but...
>> [ ] -0 Really should fix...
>> [ ] -1 We should not release this RC
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Phil
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release pool 2.3 based on RC1
Posted by Emmanuel Bourg <eb...@apache.org>.
I observed 2 test failures on Windows with Java 6, 7 and 8 that didn't
happen with the previous version:
Tests run: 58, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 156.641
sec <<< FAILURE! - in
org.apache.commons.pool2.impl.TestGenericKeyedObjectPool
testClientWaitStats(org.apache.commons.pool2.impl.TestGenericKeyedObjectPool)
Time elapsed: 0.11 sec <<< FAILURE!
java.lang.AssertionError: null
at org.junit.Assert.fail(Assert.java:86)
at org.junit.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:41)
at org.junit.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:52)
at
org.apache.commons.pool2.impl.TestGenericKeyedObjectPool.testClientWaitStats(TestGenericKeyedObjectPool.java:1583)
Tests run: 70, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 73.891
sec <<< FAILURE! - in org.apache.commons.pool2.impl.TestGenericObjectPool
testBorrowObjectFairness(org.apache.commons.pool2.impl.TestGenericObjectPool)
Time elapsed: 2.437 sec <<< FAILURE!
java.lang.AssertionError: Thread 36 failed: java.lang.Throwable:
Expected: 36 found: 37
at org.junit.Assert.fail(Assert.java:88)
at
org.apache.commons.pool2.impl.TestGenericObjectPool.testBorrowObjectFairness(TestGenericObjectPool.java:2034)
The tests worked fine on Debian with OpenJDK 6 & 7 .
Emmanuel Bourg
Le 23/12/2014 18:32, Phil Steitz a écrit :
> Tag:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/pool/tags/POOL_2_3_RC1/
>
> Release:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/
>
> Maven:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1070
>
> Site:
> http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/pool/pool-2.3-rc1/
>
> Release notes:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/RELEASE-NOTES.txt
>
> Votes, please. This vote will close in 72 hours (26-Dec 17:30 GMT)
>
> [ ] +1 Release this
> [ ] +0 Ok, but...
> [ ] -0 Really should fix...
> [ ] -1 We should not release this RC
>
> Thanks!
>
> Phil
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release pool 2.3 based on RC1
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
Here is my +1
Phil
On 12/23/14 10:32 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> Tag:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/pool/tags/POOL_2_3_RC1/
>
> Release:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/
>
> Maven:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1070
>
> Site:
> http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/pool/pool-2.3-rc1/
>
> Release notes:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/RELEASE-NOTES.txt
>
> Votes, please. This vote will close in 72 hours (26-Dec 17:30 GMT)
>
> [ ] +1 Release this
> [ ] +0 Ok, but...
> [ ] -0 Really should fix...
> [ ] -1 We should not release this RC
>
> Thanks!
>
> Phil
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release pool 2.3 based on RC1
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
On 12/23/14 5:48 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 23 December 2014 at 21:57, Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 12/23/14 1:11 PM, sebb wrote:
>>> On 23 December 2014 at 17:32, Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Tag:
>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/pool/tags/POOL_2_3_RC1/
>>
>> r1647682
>>
>>>> Tags are not immutable;
>> My tags are.
> But someone else could change it.
>
>>> the vote thread needs the revision.
>>>
>>>> Release:
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/
>> r7545
>>> Likewise, the URL does not uniquely identify what artifacts are being voted on.
>>> A revision or hashes of the artifacts are needed.
>>>
>>> Also need link to KEYS file so can check the sigs
>> My key has been on the commons KEYs file for 10+ years now. I would
>> expect Commons PMC members to know where to grab that file.
> But the vote thread should allow anyone to review the code, not just
> those in the know.
>
>>>> Maven:
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1070
>>>>
>>>> Site:
>>>> http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/pool/pool-2.3-rc1/
>>>>
>>>> Release notes:
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/RELEASE-NOTES.txt
>>>>
>>>> Votes, please. This vote will close in 72 hours (26-Dec 17:30 GMT)
>>>>
>>>> [ ] +1 Release this
>>>> [ ] +0 Ok, but...
>>>> [ ] -0 Really should fix...
>>>> [X] -1 We should not release this RC
>>> The code contains LinkedBlockingDeque which is based on 3rd party code.
>>> There is no corresponding mention in the LICENSE file, this needs to be added.
>> This is Apache Harmony code. The ASF license header is there in the
>> source.
> Yes, but the NOTICE file contains a reference to
>
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain
>
> This is a license, and if it applies to the code, it needs to be in
> the LICENSE file.
> If it does not apply, why is it in NOTICE?
>
> I've found what I assume is the original file:
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/harmony/enhanced/java/branches/java6/classlib/modules/concurrent/src/main/java/java/util/concurrent/LinkedBlockingDeque.java
>
> This has the header:
>
> /*
> * Written by Doug Lea with assistance from members of JCP JSR-166
> * Expert Group and released to the public domain, as explained at
> * http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain
> */
>
> This does not look to me like a copyright statement that needs to be
> removed to NOTICE.
> See:
> http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#headers
>
> Seems to me that a simple mention in LICENSE should be enough.
Not a blocker, IMO, but if you want to modify the files as you see
fit, go ahead and commit to trunk and I will pick up that changes if
there is another RC. Otherwise, this one will go out like 2.0, 2.1,
2.2.
Phil
>
>> Phil
>>> I'm not sure that there should be a mention in the NOTICE file.
>>> There does not appear to be an attribution requirement.
>>> Or was the attribution removed from existing code?
>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> Phil
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release pool 2.3 based on RC1
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
On 12/23/14 5:48 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 23 December 2014 at 21:57, Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 12/23/14 1:11 PM, sebb wrote:
>>> On 23 December 2014 at 17:32, Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Tag:
>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/pool/tags/POOL_2_3_RC1/
>>
>> r1647682
>>
>>>> Tags are not immutable;
>> My tags are.
> But someone else could change it.
>
>>> the vote thread needs the revision.
>>>
>>>> Release:
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/
>> r7545
>>> Likewise, the URL does not uniquely identify what artifacts are being voted on.
>>> A revision or hashes of the artifacts are needed.
>>>
>>> Also need link to KEYS file so can check the sigs
>> My key has been on the commons KEYs file for 10+ years now. I would
>> expect Commons PMC members to know where to grab that file.
> But the vote thread should allow anyone to review the code, not just
> those in the know.
>
>>>> Maven:
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1070
>>>>
>>>> Site:
>>>> http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/pool/pool-2.3-rc1/
>>>>
>>>> Release notes:
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/RELEASE-NOTES.txt
>>>>
>>>> Votes, please. This vote will close in 72 hours (26-Dec 17:30 GMT)
>>>>
>>>> [ ] +1 Release this
>>>> [ ] +0 Ok, but...
>>>> [ ] -0 Really should fix...
>>>> [X] -1 We should not release this RC
>>> The code contains LinkedBlockingDeque which is based on 3rd party code.
>>> There is no corresponding mention in the LICENSE file, this needs to be added.
>> This is Apache Harmony code. The ASF license header is there in the
>> source.
> Yes, but the NOTICE file contains a reference to
>
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain
>
> This is a license, and if it applies to the code, it needs to be in
> the LICENSE file.
> If it does not apply, why is it in NOTICE?
>
> I've found what I assume is the original file:
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/harmony/enhanced/java/branches/java6/classlib/modules/concurrent/src/main/java/java/util/concurrent/LinkedBlockingDeque.java
>
> This has the header:
>
> /*
> * Written by Doug Lea with assistance from members of JCP JSR-166
> * Expert Group and released to the public domain, as explained at
> * http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain
> */
>
> This does not look to me like a copyright statement that needs to be
> removed to NOTICE.
> See:
> http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#headers
>
> Seems to me that a simple mention in LICENSE should be enough.
I was on the fence between just putting the header back into the
source or moving the text from NOTICE to LICENSE. I did that
latter. Any objections to that?
Phil
>
>> Phil
>>> I'm not sure that there should be a mention in the NOTICE file.
>>> There does not appear to be an attribution requirement.
>>> Or was the attribution removed from existing code?
>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> Phil
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release pool 2.3 based on RC1
Posted by Emmanuel Bourg <eb...@apache.org>.
Le 24/12/2014 01:48, sebb a écrit :
> But someone else could change it.
This has never happened and is easily tracked by the commit mails and
the SVN history. Let's focus on realistic issues.
Emmanuel Bourg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release pool 2.3 based on RC1
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 23 December 2014 at 21:57, Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12/23/14 1:11 PM, sebb wrote:
>> On 23 December 2014 at 17:32, Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Tag:
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/pool/tags/POOL_2_3_RC1/
>
>
> r1647682
>
>>>
>>> Tags are not immutable;
> My tags are.
But someone else could change it.
>> the vote thread needs the revision.
>>
>>> Release:
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/
> r7545
>> Likewise, the URL does not uniquely identify what artifacts are being voted on.
>> A revision or hashes of the artifacts are needed.
>>
>> Also need link to KEYS file so can check the sigs
>
> My key has been on the commons KEYs file for 10+ years now. I would
> expect Commons PMC members to know where to grab that file.
But the vote thread should allow anyone to review the code, not just
those in the know.
>>
>>> Maven:
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1070
>>>
>>> Site:
>>> http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/pool/pool-2.3-rc1/
>>>
>>> Release notes:
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/RELEASE-NOTES.txt
>>>
>>> Votes, please. This vote will close in 72 hours (26-Dec 17:30 GMT)
>>>
>>> [ ] +1 Release this
>>> [ ] +0 Ok, but...
>>> [ ] -0 Really should fix...
>>> [X] -1 We should not release this RC
>> The code contains LinkedBlockingDeque which is based on 3rd party code.
>> There is no corresponding mention in the LICENSE file, this needs to be added.
>
> This is Apache Harmony code. The ASF license header is there in the
> source.
Yes, but the NOTICE file contains a reference to
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain
This is a license, and if it applies to the code, it needs to be in
the LICENSE file.
If it does not apply, why is it in NOTICE?
I've found what I assume is the original file:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/harmony/enhanced/java/branches/java6/classlib/modules/concurrent/src/main/java/java/util/concurrent/LinkedBlockingDeque.java
This has the header:
/*
* Written by Doug Lea with assistance from members of JCP JSR-166
* Expert Group and released to the public domain, as explained at
* http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain
*/
This does not look to me like a copyright statement that needs to be
removed to NOTICE.
See:
http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#headers
Seems to me that a simple mention in LICENSE should be enough.
> Phil
>>
>> I'm not sure that there should be a mention in the NOTICE file.
>> There does not appear to be an attribution requirement.
>> Or was the attribution removed from existing code?
>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> Phil
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release pool 2.3 based on RC1
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
On 12/23/14 1:11 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 23 December 2014 at 17:32, Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Tag:
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/pool/tags/POOL_2_3_RC1/
r1647682
>>
>> Tags are not immutable;
My tags are.
> the vote thread needs the revision.
>
>> Release:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/
r7545
> Likewise, the URL does not uniquely identify what artifacts are being voted on.
> A revision or hashes of the artifacts are needed.
>
> Also need link to KEYS file so can check the sigs
My key has been on the commons KEYs file for 10+ years now. I would
expect Commons PMC members to know where to grab that file.
>
>> Maven:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1070
>>
>> Site:
>> http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/pool/pool-2.3-rc1/
>>
>> Release notes:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/RELEASE-NOTES.txt
>>
>> Votes, please. This vote will close in 72 hours (26-Dec 17:30 GMT)
>>
>> [ ] +1 Release this
>> [ ] +0 Ok, but...
>> [ ] -0 Really should fix...
>> [X] -1 We should not release this RC
> The code contains LinkedBlockingDeque which is based on 3rd party code.
> There is no corresponding mention in the LICENSE file, this needs to be added.
This is Apache Harmony code. The ASF license header is there in the
source.
Phil
>
> I'm not sure that there should be a mention in the NOTICE file.
> There does not appear to be an attribution requirement.
> Or was the attribution removed from existing code?
>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Phil
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release pool 2.3 based on RC1
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 23 December 2014 at 17:32, Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Tag:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/pool/tags/POOL_2_3_RC1/
Tags are not immutable; the vote thread needs the revision.
> Release:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/
Likewise, the URL does not uniquely identify what artifacts are being voted on.
A revision or hashes of the artifacts are needed.
Also need link to KEYS file so can check the sigs
> Maven:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1070
>
> Site:
> http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/pool/pool-2.3-rc1/
>
> Release notes:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/RELEASE-NOTES.txt
>
> Votes, please. This vote will close in 72 hours (26-Dec 17:30 GMT)
>
> [ ] +1 Release this
> [ ] +0 Ok, but...
> [ ] -0 Really should fix...
> [X] -1 We should not release this RC
The code contains LinkedBlockingDeque which is based on 3rd party code.
There is no corresponding mention in the LICENSE file, this needs to be added.
I'm not sure that there should be a mention in the NOTICE file.
There does not appear to be an attribution requirement.
Or was the attribution removed from existing code?
> Thanks!
>
> Phil
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release pool 2.3 based on RC1
Posted by Luc Maisonobe <lu...@spaceroots.org>.
Le 24/12/2014 11:10, Emmanuel Bourg a écrit :
> Le 24/12/2014 10:46, Luc Maisonobe a écrit :
>
>> CLIRR reports about getFairness() being added to an interface. Is this
>> interface intended to be implemented by users or not? If yes, then I
>> guess we cannot say in the release notes that:
>>
>> "No client code changes are required to migrate from version 2.0, 2.1,
>> or 2.2 to 2.3."
>>
>> If not (i.e. if the interface is really intended to be an internal one),
>> then I will change my -0 to a +1.
>
> I think this is intended for the JMX beans. The release notes state:
>
> "The MBean interfaces (DefaultPooledObjectInfoMBean,
> GenericKeyedObjectPoolMXBean and GenericKeyedObjectPoolMXBean) exist
> only to define the attributes and methods that will be made available
> via JMX. They must not be implemented by clients as they are subject to
> change between major, minor and patch version releases of Commons Pool.
> Clients that implement any of these interfaces may not, therefore, be
> able to upgrade to a new minor or patch release without requiring code
> changes."
Fine,
Then I change my previous -0 into a +1 for this vote.
best regards,
Luc
>
> Emmanuel Bourg
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release pool 2.3 based on RC1
Posted by Emmanuel Bourg <eb...@apache.org>.
Le 24/12/2014 10:46, Luc Maisonobe a écrit :
> CLIRR reports about getFairness() being added to an interface. Is this
> interface intended to be implemented by users or not? If yes, then I
> guess we cannot say in the release notes that:
>
> "No client code changes are required to migrate from version 2.0, 2.1,
> or 2.2 to 2.3."
>
> If not (i.e. if the interface is really intended to be an internal one),
> then I will change my -0 to a +1.
I think this is intended for the JMX beans. The release notes state:
"The MBean interfaces (DefaultPooledObjectInfoMBean,
GenericKeyedObjectPoolMXBean and GenericKeyedObjectPoolMXBean) exist
only to define the attributes and methods that will be made available
via JMX. They must not be implemented by clients as they are subject to
change between major, minor and patch version releases of Commons Pool.
Clients that implement any of these interfaces may not, therefore, be
able to upgrade to a new minor or patch release without requiring code
changes."
Emmanuel Bourg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release pool 2.3 based on RC1
Posted by Luc Maisonobe <lu...@spaceroots.org>.
Le 23/12/2014 18:32, Phil Steitz a écrit :
> Tag:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/pool/tags/POOL_2_3_RC1/
>
> Release:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/
>
> Maven:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1070
>
> Site:
> http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/pool/pool-2.3-rc1/
>
> Release notes:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/pool/RELEASE-NOTES.txt
>
> Votes, please. This vote will close in 72 hours (26-Dec 17:30 GMT)
>
> [ ] +1 Release this
> [ ] +0 Ok, but...
> [X] -0 Really should fix...
CLIRR reports about getFairness() being added to an interface. Is this
interface intended to be implemented by users or not? If yes, then I
guess we cannot say in the release notes that:
"No client code changes are required to migrate from version 2.0, 2.1,
or 2.2 to 2.3."
If not (i.e. if the interface is really intended to be an internal one),
then I will change my -0 to a +1.
Other very minor problems are that the changes report date is TBD
instead of an estimated release date and that some parts of the JIRA
reports do not state a "fix version". It seems also there is a false
positive in the checkstyle report about a file generated by cobertura:
target/generated-classes/cobertura/cobertura.properties.
best regards,
Luc
> [ ] -1 We should not release this RC
>
> Thanks!
>
> Phil
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org