couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Noah Slater <nsla...@tumbolia.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries, round 3
Date Wed, 28 Mar 2012 17:32:22 GMT
Dave, when you wrap up this thread, please do not refer to it as a vote, or
change the subject to "vote results."

Thanks!

On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Noah Slater <nslater@tumbolia.org> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> This is an important note from the PMC.
>
> We were in error to call this thread a vote, and this is my fault.
>
> To get things clear:
>
>    - The PMC does not vote on binary packages. The PMC only votes on
>    release artefacts, which are always source packages.
>    - The Windows binaries are being provided by Dave Cottlehuber for
>    convenience only, and do not constitute a release by the PMC.
>    - We will host the Windows binaries in our project distribution
>    directory, but we will add a note to inform users that any binary packages
>    are not official releases and are provided for convenience only.
>    - Binary packages which are referenced by the project (from the
>    website, for instance) will always be built from a corresponding source
>    release.
>    - Dave Cottlehuber has done astounding work getting us to this point,
>    and I am very pleased that so many people have provided feedback. In
>    future, Dave will be asking for testers, but we will not be referring to
>    this as a vote.
>    - With my PMC hat on, and my Release Team hat on, I can tell you that
>    we will try to run the release in parallel with any binary package testing.
>    If there are significant problems in either, we will abort both. We will
>    also try to announce the availability of binary packages along with the
>    source release announcement.
>
> Apologies that this has come so late in the thread. Be assured that it
> does not change anything, and we are still moving forward as planned. But
> it is important, as a PMC, that we get our terminology right, and set
> expectations appropriately.
>
> Thank you,
>
> N
>
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 11:16 PM, Randall Leeds <randall.leeds@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 12:29, Nick North <north.n@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Not sure whether to be annoyed or not: when I run the replicator_db test
>> > with Firebug installed it passes every time. I'm guessing that it is
>> some
>> > timing issue and the debugger slows things down enough to prevent it
>> > happening.
>> >
>> > Similarly the Win8 view_compaction test works in my Firebugged Firefox.
>> So
>> > now I'm a more positive +1, though just a little peeved that it's not
>> > possible to track down the problems.
>>
>> Well that is helpful, thanks. I'm compiling a private bullet list of
>> test-related issues to bring to the group for attacking after 1.2.
>> I'll take a look at this with an eye towards timing sensitive
>> behaviour.
>>
>> -Randall
>>
>> >
>> > Nick
>> > On 25 March 2012 22:35, Dave Cottlehuber <dave@muse.net.nz> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 25 March 2012 21:28, Nick North <north.n@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > +1
>> >> > Windows 7 Ultimate x64 SP1
>> >> > Windows 8 Consumer Preview x64 ( on VMWare Player)
>> >> > Firefox 11.0
>> >> > Signature: is there a missing .asc file? I didn't see the signature
>> file,
>> >> > but am probably missing something obvious.
>> >>
>> >> I noticed that I didn't upload them at same time as the shas etc,
>> >> they're there now. Sorry!
>> >>
>> >> 1.2.0_otp_R15B.exe.asc although they were missing up until
>> >> > Md5 & sha OK.
>> >> > No malware detected.
>> >> > End-user verification OK.
>> >> > Futon tests passed on Win7 with the usual exception of our friend
>> >> > replicator_db, with the usual error:
>> >> > Assertion failed: expected 'null', got
>> >> >
>> >>
>> '{"_id":"foo666","_rev":"1-8f008c4354eb07d5fbfc399a84bc88a1","value":666}'
>> >>
>> >> We shouldn't be seeing that anymore. Do you feel like running this in a
>> >> debugger
>> >> and seeing what breaks?
>> >>
>> >> > Futon tests passed on Win8 with the exception of view_compaction,
>> which
>> >> > says:
>> >> > Assertion failed: resp.view_index.disk_size <
>> disk_size_before_compact
>> >>
>> >> If you gently re-run that a few times does it come right? I had varying
>> >> results,
>> >> still digging on what the issue is in this one.
>> >>
>> >> > I vote +1 on the rounds that the replicator_db error seems
>> well-known and
>> >> > not a genuine problem, and issues with Win8 can't really be addressed
>> >> until
>> >> > the final release of the OS. I was not prompted for a restart after
>> >> > installation, by the way.
>> >> > On 25 March 2012 18:49, Dave Cottlehuber <dave@muse.net.nz> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Hello,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I would like to call a vote on the following Windows binaries based
>> on
>> >> >> the concurrent Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release artefact from git:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 654768d32bae3639756c18b200582093aa51f349
>> >> >>
>> >> >> https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/
>> >> >>
>> >> >> These have been built using Microsoft SDK 7.1, and includes the
>> >> >> following 3rd party code:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Erlang R14B04 or R15B
>> >> >> OpenSSL 0.9.8r
>> >> >> wxWidgets 2.8.12
>> >> >> Mozilla JavaScript 1.8.5
>> >> >> cURL 7.23.1
>> >> >> ICU 4.6.1
>> >> >> Inno setup 5.4.3
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Please follow the test procedure before voting:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> https://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
>> >> >>
>> >> >> We encourage the whole community to download and test these
>> >> >> release artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved
>> before the
>> >> >> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so get
>> stuck
>> >> in!
>> >> >>
>> >> >> A+
>> >> >> Dave
>> >> >>
>> >>
>>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message