curator-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Cameron McKenzie <mckenzie....@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Curator version 2.10.0 and 3.1.0
Date Wed, 10 Feb 2016 01:10:55 GMT
3.0 build ran with no test errors. Nice work Scott!

On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Cameron McKenzie <mckenzie.cam@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Thanks for sorting this Scott,
> I'm running the tests on 3.0 now.
> cheers
>
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 10:17 AM, Scott Blum <dragonsinth@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Alright... pushed!  I think this fixes things.  Thanks for your patience!
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 6:03 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <
>> jordan@jordanzimmerman.com
>> > wrote:
>>
>> > Sounds good - go ahead.
>> >
>> > On Feb 9, 2016, at 6:02 PM, Scott Blum <dragonsinth@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > I want to push a commit to master, merge master into 3.0, and then push
>> > another commit into 3.0.  I think this will fix TestTreeCache and also
>> > generally make that test fail faster if we write a bad test in the
>> future.
>> >
>> > On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 5:55 PM, Scott Blum <dragonsinth@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> I think the problem may be that the new testCreateParents() test is
>> >> creating pollution.. working on this now.
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Jordan Zimmerman <
>> >> jordan@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> I’d really like to do a simultaneous release. So, I’ll cancel this
>> >>> release.
>> >>>
>> >>> -Jordan
>> >>>
>> >>> On Feb 9, 2016, at 11:51 AM, Scott Blum <dragonsinth@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Actually let me clarify..
>> >>>
>> >>> +1 on 2.10.0
>> >>> -1 on 3.1.0
>> >>>
>> >>> On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 11:50 AM, Scott Blum <dragonsinth@gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Going to -1 until we track down the TestTreeCache failures (today).
>> >>>> Also, floated a potential issue with NamespaceWatcher under separate
>> >>>> subject.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 5:45 AM, Scott Blum <dragonsinth@gmail.com>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> Let me take a look tomorrow.  I had no idea they were failing
on
>> 3.0.
>> >>>>> Maybe this was known-failures masking unknown-failures.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 10:43 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <
>> >>>>> jordan@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> Should we cancel the release? Scott?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> > On Feb 8, 2016, at 10:21 PM, Cameron McKenzie <
>> >>>>>> mckenzie.cam@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>> >
>> >>>>>> > +1
>> >>>>>> >
>> >>>>>> > The tree cache tests still seem to be failing for me
on the 3.0
>> >>>>>> branch
>> >>>>>> > though.
>> >>>>>> >
>> >>>>>> > On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 10:41 AM, Cameron McKenzie <
>> >>>>>> mckenzie.cam@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>> > wrote:
>> >>>>>> >
>> >>>>>> >> OK, let me rerun the tests. I think that making
the tests more
>> >>>>>> reliable
>> >>>>>> >> would definitely be a good thing. I'm happy to
have a look into
>> >>>>>> this also.
>> >>>>>> >> cheers
>> >>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>> >> On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Jordan Zimmerman
<
>> >>>>>> >> jordan@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>> >>> Many tests are flakey and fail/pass. I have
plans to address
>> this
>> >>>>>> in the
>> >>>>>> >>> future. But, I don’t think it should hold
the release as it’s
>> >>>>>> been the case
>> >>>>>> >>> for a long time. But, I’m OK with whatever
the group decides.
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>> >>> -JZ
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> On Feb 8, 2016, at 6:25 PM, Cameron McKenzie
<
>> >>>>>> mckenzie.cam@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> Keys verify OK.
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> 2.10.0:
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> TestBoundedDistributedQueue.testMulti failed
on the first run,
>> >>>>>> but
>> >>>>>> >>> passed
>> >>>>>> >>>> subsequently, so I guess this is ok.
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> 3.1.0:
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> Failed tests:
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>>
>> org.apache.curator.framework.recipes.cache.TestTreeCache.testDeleteNodeAfterCloseDoesntCallExecutor(org.apache.curator.framework.recipes.cache.TestTreeCache)
>> >>>>>> >>>> Run 1:
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>>
>> TestTreeCache.testDeleteNodeAfterCloseDoesntCallExecutor:533->BaseTestTreeCache.assertEvent:158->BaseTestTreeCache.assertEvent:170
>> >>>>>> >>>> TreeCacheEvent{type=INITIALIZED, data=null}
expected
>> >>>>>> [NODE_ADDED] but
>> >>>>>> >>> found
>> >>>>>> >>>> [INITIALIZED]
>> >>>>>> >>>> Run 2:
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>>
>> TestTreeCache.testDeleteNodeAfterCloseDoesntCallExecutor:537->BaseTestTreeCache.assertEvent:158->BaseTestTreeCache.assertEvent:178
>> >>>>>> >>>> TreeCacheEvent{type=NODE_ADDED, data=ChildData{path='/test',
>> >>>>>> >>>> stat=2,2,1454970465429,1454970465429,0,0,0,0,9,0,2
>> >>>>>> >>>> , data=[49, 50, 55, 46, 48, 46, 49, 46,
49]}} expected
>> >>>>>> [/test/one] but
>> >>>>>> >>>> found [/test]
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>>
>> org.apache.curator.framework.recipes.cache.TestTreeCache.testDeleteThenCreate(org.apache.curator.framework.recipes.cache.TestTreeCache)
>> >>>>>> >>>> Run 1:
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>>
>> TestTreeCache.testDeleteThenCreate:371->BaseTestTreeCache.assertEvent:158->BaseTestTreeCache.assertEvent:170
>> >>>>>> >>>> TreeCacheEvent{type=INITIALIZED, data=null}
expected
>> >>>>>> [NODE_ADDED] but
>> >>>>>> >>> found
>> >>>>>> >>>> [INITIALIZED]
>> >>>>>> >>>> Run 2: PASS
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 6:00 AM, Jordan
Zimmerman <
>> >>>>>> randgalt@apache.org>
>> >>>>>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>> Hello,
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>> This is a combined vote to release
Apache Curator versions
>> >>>>>> 2.10.0 and
>> >>>>>> >>> 3.1.0
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>> *** Please download, test and vote
within approx. 72 hours
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>> Note that we are voting upon the source
(tag) and binaries
>> are
>> >>>>>> >>>>> provided for convenience.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>> Link to release notes:
>> >>>>>> >>>>> 2.1.10 -
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12333942
>> >>>>>> >>>>> 3.1.0 -
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12314425&version=12333884
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>> Staging repos:
>> >>>>>> >>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/curator/2.10.0/
>> >>>>>> >>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/curator/3.1.0/
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>> Binary artifacts:
>> >>>>>> >>>>> 2.1.10 -
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1020
>> >>>>>> >>>>> 3.1.0 -
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecurator-1021
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>> The tags to be voted upon:
>> >>>>>> >>>>> 2.10.0 -
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>>
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=eaaba2fe96a964654631ed4248315f83ea677521
>> >>>>>> >>>>> 3.1.0 -
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>>
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=curator.git;a=tag;h=2cd4babca1720cd3acb501d76d5c2fad90aaf2c9
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>> Curator's KEYS file containing PGP
keys we use to sign the
>> >>>>>> release:
>> >>>>>> >>>>> http://www.apache.org/dist/curator/KEYS
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>> [ ] +1  approve
>> >>>>>> >>>>> [ ] +0  no opinion
>> >>>>>> >>>>> [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>

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