incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de.INVALID>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release 1.5 of NetBeans HTML/Java API
Date Sun, 22 Oct 2017 16:53:13 GMT
Hmm, well, but that usually only happens if it is clear that the vote should get cancelled.

LieGrue,
strub

> Am 22.10.2017 um 15:29 schrieb sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com>:
> 
> On 21 October 2017 at 18:27, Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de.invalid> wrote:
>>> Even though there is no
>>> veto vote on releases, if someone raised a valid issue, the group might
>>> postpone a release as well, even after +1s.
>> 
>> 
>> Yes indeed. Sometimes a single person discovers a problem during the voting process
and casts -1.
>> A -1 always should come with good arguments.
>> Usually that leads to the others (who already voted) review this argument. And if
it turns out to really be a problem which the others have simply overlooked, then they often
amend their vote to a -1 as well.
> 
> Or the RM can just cancel the vote if it's obvious that the problem is
> sufficiently serious.
> I don't think there is any need for additional -1 votes in that case.
> 
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>> 
>> 
>>> Am 21.10.2017 um 19:15 schrieb Wade Chandler <wadechandler@apache.org>:
>>> 
>>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>>> 
>>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
>>> 
>>> It is technically both with nuances. Time and 3 binding +1s plus a majority
>>> +1s. The 72 hours is a participation enabler. The 3 bindings is the minimum
>>> required, but a majority -1s would be a big deal. Even though there is no
>>> veto vote on releases, if someone raised a valid issue, the group might
>>> postpone a release as well, even after +1s.
>>> 
>>> Wade
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Oct 21, 2017 08:55, "Geertjan Wielenga" <geertjan.wielenga@googlemail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Many thanks -- so, right now, Bertrand, John, and Mark have done binding
>>>> votes -- i.e., two of our mentors and the VP Incubator.
>>>> 
>>>> How many binding votes are needed or is it simply a question of time, i.e.,
>>>> at the time that the vote expires, if there's no -1, and only +1 binding
>>>> votes, then the release of this specific repo that is one of the repose of
>>>> Apache NetBeans is approved?
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> 
>>>> Gj
>>>> 
>>>> On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de.invalid>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> +1 IPMC binding
>>>>> 
>>>>> LICENSE, NOTICE, rat, dependencies, signing, etc all looks good.
>>>>> 
>>>>> However when building it from the distribution zip on my macbook with
>>>>> java8 144 I sometimes get test errors.
>>>>> All of them in knockout.js, but each time something different:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Configuring TestNG with: TestNG652Configurator
>>>>> Oct 21, 2017 1:55:53 PM org.glassfish.grizzly.http.
>>>> server.NetworkListener
>>>>> start
>>>>> INFORMATION: Started listener bound to [0.0.0.0:18572]
>>>>> Oct 21, 2017 1:55:53 PM org.glassfish.grizzly.http.server.HttpServer
>>>> start
>>>>> INFORMATION: [HttpServer] Started.
>>>>> Tests run: 78, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 6.451
>>>> sec
>>>>> <<< FAILURE!
>>>>> displayContentOfComputedArrayOnComputedASubpair(org.
>>>> netbeans.html.ko4j.KOFx)
>>>>> Time elapsed: 0.03 sec  <<< FAILURE!
>>>>> java.lang.AssertionError: We got callback from 2nd child null expecting:
>>>>> null actual: Last
>>>>>       at net.java.html.json.tests.Utils.assertEquals(Utils.java:217)
>>>>>       at net.java.html.json.tests.KnockoutTest.
>>>>> displayContentOfComputedArrayOnComputedASubpair(KnockoutTest.java:622)
>>>>>       at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
>>>>>       at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
>>>>> NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62)
>>>>>       at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
>>>>> DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
>>>>>       at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498)
>>>>>       at org.netbeans.html.ko4j.KOFx.run(KOFx.java:73)
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Tests run: 78, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 7.772
>>>> sec
>>>>> <<< FAILURE!
>>>>> rawObject(org.netbeans.html.ko4j.KOFx)  Time elapsed: 0.067 sec  <<<
>>>>> FAILURE!
>>>>> netscape.javascript.JSException: netscape.javascript.JSException:
>>>>> java.lang.NullPointerException
>>>>>       at org.netbeans.html.ko4j.$JsCallbacks$.raw$org_netbeans_
>>>>> html_ko4j_Knockout$setValue$ILjava_lang_Object_2($JsCallbacks$.java:156)
>>>>>       at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
>>>>>       at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
>>>>> NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62)
>>>>>       at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
>>>>> DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
>>>>>       at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498)
>>>>>       at sun.reflect.misc.Trampoline.invoke(MethodUtil.java:71)
>>>>>       at sun.reflect.GeneratedMethodAccessor1.invoke(Unknown Source)
>>>>>       at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
>>>>> DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
>>>>>       at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498)
>>>>>       at sun.reflect.misc.MethodUtil.invoke(MethodUtil.java:275)
>>>>>       at com.sun.webkit.Utilities.lambda$fwkInvokeWithContext$
>>>>> 60(Utilities.java:94)
>>>>>       at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
>>>>>       at com.sun.webkit.Utilities.fwkInvokeWithContext(
>>>>> Utilities.java:94)
>>>>>       at com.sun.webkit.dom.JSObject.callImpl(Native Method)
>>>>>       at com.sun.webkit.dom.JSObject.call(JSObject.java:115)
>>>>>       at org.netbeans.html.boot.fx.AbstractFXPresenter$JSFn.
>>>> invokeImpl(
>>>>> AbstractFXPresenter.java:418)
>>>>> 
>>>>> Failed tests:
>>>>> KOFx.run:73 ยป JS netscape.javascript.JSException:
>>>>> java.lang.NullPointerExcepti...
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Running the build for the forth time made it succeed.
>>>>> I'd say it's not a blocker for the release, but we might improve the
test
>>>>> setup.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> txs for rolling the release!
>>>>> 
>>>>> LieGrue,
>>>>> strub
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Am 21.10.2017 um 14:04 schrieb John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org>:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Here's my +1 to release.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 8:43 AM Bertrand Delacretaz <
>>>>>> bdelacretaz@codeconsult.ch> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Jaroslav Tulach
>>>>>>> <jaroslav.tulach@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> ...I'd like to ask you to hold the Incubator
>>>>>>>> PMC vote to release:..
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Here's my +1 repeated from the podling list for
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> SHA1(incubating-netbeans-html4j-1.5.zip)=
>>>>>>> fd77975f1adbcbc4b926e1cfab6865f47db6df3c
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Jaroslav's GPG key is included in
>>>>>>> https://people.apache.org/keys/group/netbeans.asc
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> -Bertrand
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message