couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Noah Slater <nsla...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Apache CouchDB 1.3.0-rc.1
Date Tue, 12 Mar 2013 19:18:18 GMT
Eli,

Yes, sorry, it is a bit confusing.

If you are testing a binary package, then what you are testing is that the
package runs, and that the installation seems okay. Jan, or Dave will
provide any additional steps you should take to test them.

When I am talking about test failures on this thread, I am just talking
about the source release. Specifically, the tests that are run when you run
"make check" from the tarball directory.

The Futon tests have actually been removed from Futon in the release branch
and on master. I decided not to cut a second release candidate for this. I
have completely removed that step from the test procedure. The only thing
you need to run is "make check" from the CLI.

The only thing to watch out for is that the tests can sometimes fail. You
can either run the tests separately a second time, or until they pass. Or
you can just run "make check" a second time.




On 12 March 2013 18:49, Eli Stevens (Gmail) <wickedgrey@gmail.com> wrote:

> Is there a clear statement on if we should expect the futon tests to pass
> under OSX using the precompiled binaries?
>
> I'm intending to to try the OSX binaries when I have a moment, but it feels
> like there's some mixed messaging about if we should expect the tests to
> work (Jan's mail just says to use the verify install link, but Noah's says
> we should be reporting test failures).  Would the tests work if I compiled
> from source?
>
> I humbly suggest that having a well-defined list of caveats and exceptions
> associated with a release candidate would be helpful.
>
> Eli
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Noah Slater <nslater@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Hey folks.
> >
> > I spent some time talking to Wendal last night. I think he's going to be
> > preparing some error logs for us to look at.
> >
> > Can I ask everyone else here: If you experience errors with the test
> suite,
> > please, please, please put them in a Gist and share with the list. Even
> if
> > you get them working on a second try, or you don't think it's an issue.
> We
> > want to collect as many logs as possible. This will really help us in our
> > quest to fix the remaining issues in the tests.
> >
> > Thanks everyone! We'll probably keep this open longer than the usual
> three
> > days to get more testing, and to collect more logs.
> >
> > (Also, more votes please! Looking at you, PMC members...)
> >
> >
> > On 10 March 2013 21:24, Noah Slater <nslater@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Dear community,
> > >
> > > I would like to call a vote on Apache CouchDB 1.3.0-rc.1.
> > >
> > > We encourage the whole community to download and test these release
> > > artefacts 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!
> > >
> > > The release artefacts we are voting on are available here:
> > >
> > >     wget
> > >
> >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/couchdb/source/1.3.0/rc.1/apache-couchdb-1.3.0.tar.gz
> > >     wget
> > >
> >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/couchdb/source/1.3.0/rc.1/apache-couchdb-1.3.0.tar.gz.asc
> > >     wget
> > >
> >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/couchdb/source/1.3.0/rc.1/apache-couchdb-1.3.0.tar.gz.ish
> > >     wget
> > >
> >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/couchdb/source/1.3.0/rc.1/apache-couchdb-1.3.0.tar.gz.md5
> > >     wget
> > >
> >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/couchdb/source/1.3.0/rc.1/apache-couchdb-1.3.0.tar.gz.sha
> > >
> > > Please follow the test procedure here:
> > >
> > >     http://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Test_procedure
> > >
> > > Please remember that "rc.1" is an annotation. If the vote passes, these
> > > artefacts will be released as Apache CouchDB 1.3.0.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > --
> > > NS
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > NS
> >
>



-- 
NS

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