harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Oliver Deakin <oliver.dea...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: [general] Code Freeze for Milestone 5.0M14 and 6.0M2
Date Wed, 19 May 2010 19:29:43 GMT
On 19/05/2010 17:35, Mark Hindess wrote:
> In message<AANLkTin-Ic1yh7t0hAg8upgocdxol2ev_S_MqGs822J6@mail.gmail.com>,
> Catherine Hope writes:
>    
>> I have a problem with fetch-depends on the Java 6
>> branch - the bsf dependency is out of date, so should
>> be fixed before the release.  I've raised it here:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-6513
>>      
> Thanks Cath.  I was also looking at this.  I was trying to decide if
> it was best to upgrade (as your patch does) or just change to download
> the jar from maven repository.  Annoyingly, the md5sum of the jar in
> the maven repository is slightly different from the one in the zip (for
> trivial reasons).  This means that upgrading is probably the least
> hassle option.
>
> So, I'd like a second committer to agree the commit of your patch?
>    

+1 to applying the patch.

Regards,
Oliver


> Regards,
>   Mark.
>
>    
>> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 1:45 PM, Catherine Hope<
>> catherine.v.hope@googlemail.com>  wrote:
>>
>>      
>>> I also see these 2 tests failing in the same way.  It seems to be caused by
>>> Regis' commit 944119 "SocketChannelImpl.SocketAdapter's remote address
>>> should be updated after channel connected" on 14/05/2010.  It could be that
>>> the tests are invalid though - the first one is checking that the
>>> SocketAddress returned by getRemoteAddress() is a different object to the
>>> one that was passed to connect(), though as SocketAddress is immutable woul
>>>        
>> d
>>      
>>> this cause a problem?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 10:41 AM, Oliver Deakin<
>>> oliver.deakin@googlemail.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>>        
>>>> Running the tests on a java 5 federated tree on Windows XP x86 the only
>>>> failures I don't recognise are:
>>>> org.apache.harmony.nio.tests.java.nio.channels.SocketChannelTest
>>>>   - testSocket_Block_BasicStatusAfterConnect fails with
>>>> "junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: expected not same
>>>> at
>>>> org.apache.harmony.nio.tests.java.nio.channels.SocketChannelTest.assertSoc
>>>>          
>> ketAfterConnect(SocketChannelTest.java:495)"
>>      
>>>>   - testSocket_NonBlock_BasicStatusAfterConnect fails with
>>>> "junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: null
>>>> at
>>>> org.apache.harmony.nio.tests.java.nio.channels.SocketChannelTest.assertSoc
>>>>          
>> ketBeforeConnect(SocketChannelTest.java:453)"
>>      
>>>>
>>>> If I run against the RI I also see these two test methods failing but with
>>>> a different error message:
>>>> "junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: expected:<-1>  but was:<0>
>>>> at
>>>> org.apache.harmony.nio.tests.java.nio.channels.SocketChannelTest.assertSoc
>>>>          
>> ketBeforeConnect(SocketChannelTest.java:457)"
>>      
>>>> Does anyone else see this?
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Oliver
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 14/05/2010 23:48, Mark Hindess wrote:
>>>>
>>>>          
>>>>> Just a reminder that we are now in gearing up for milestone releases
so
>>>>> we are in full code freeze across all code streams.  No commits from
>>>>> now until the milestone releases are completed without two committers
>>>>> approval via this list.
>>>>>
>>>>> We should track issues that must be fixed with JIRA using the "Fix for"
>>>>> field.  To see the current must fix issues visit the Harmony JIRA page
>>>>> at:
>>>>>
>>>>>    http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY
>>>>>
>>>>> and click on the "Roadmap" view.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've deferred the fixing of a few issues but there are currently still
5
>>>>> issues blocking these releases.  If any of these issues were reported
by
>>>>> you and/or assigned to you please review them and confirm that the "must
>>>>> fix" status is warranted or remove it (or fix it if it is a bug and two
>>>>> committers accept the fix).
>>>>>
>>>>> Please test the java5 and java6 federated build and report your results
>>>>> to help prepare for our releases.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>   Mark
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>            
>>>> --
>>>> Oliver Deakin
>>>> Unless stated otherwise above:
>>>> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
>>>> 741598.
>>>> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>          
>>>
>>> --
>>> Catherine Hope
>>>
>>> Unless stated otherwise above:
>>> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
>>> 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire
>>> PO6 3AU
>>>
>>>        
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Catherine Hope
>> Unless stated otherwise above:
>> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
>> 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire
>> PO6 3AU
>>
>> --001485f4afe4da8c7a0486f4e588--
>>
>>      
>
>
>    

-- 
Oliver Deakin
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU


Mime
View raw message