incubator-jspwiki-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Siegfried Goeschl <sgoes...@gmx.at>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release JSPWiki version 2.9.0-incubating
Date Mon, 12 Nov 2012 12:23:26 GMT
Hi folks,

after a few discussion with folks from JSPWiki it seems that the problem 
stems from the guitest runner invocation

* the "guitests" issue shall be fixed after the graduation vote
* I created JSPWIKI-751 to keep track of that

So I re-cast my vote

[X ] +1 Approve the release
[] -1 Disapprove the release (please provide specific comments)

Cheers,

Siegfried

On 10.11.12 00:20, Siegfried Goeschl wrote:
> Hi Craig,
>
> worx for me ... ;-)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Siegfried Goeschl
>
> On 09.11.12 23:15, Craig L Russell wrote:
>> Hi Siegfried,
>>
>> Thanks for taking a look at the release. You have given a good reason 
>> for your -1. Reasonable people may disagree; I would not call this 
>> issue a blocker. In fact, there's no requirement that a release 
>> actually work (!) but that it is legally proper and downstream users 
>> might find it useful. That's why a -1 will not block a release, 
>> assuming more +1 than -1.
>>
>> We have several +1 and your -1 so far. If we don't get any more 
>> votes, we will forward the vote to the IPMC for their approval.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Craig
>>
>>
>> On Nov 9, 2012, at 2:09 PM, Siegfried Goeschl wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Florian and Harry,
>>>
>>> thanks for responding even in the middle of the night ...
>>>
>>> ad 1) my bad - I indeed used an old wiki page set - shame on me
>>>
>>> ad 2) "The guitests target is not part of the build sequence for 
>>> good reasons" - I know but how you find any new GUI bugs if the 
>>> guitests are considered broken and not executed? Maybe the next time 
>>> we get 18 errors instead of 17 but when the tests are ignored that 
>>> one bug could cause frustration within the JSPWiki user community 
>>> when it escapes into the real world - I had my five minutes of fame 
>>> when a late change caused a NPE in my commons-exec release - I think 
>>> I got more than 20 mails with "btw, there is a stupid NPE in this 
>>> method". IMHO it is acceptable to state that 17 tests are indeed 
>>> broken but those 17 tests should be commented out to get overall 
>>> guitests working - for the remaining 17 tests we can create a JIRA 
>>> and hope for better times.
>>>
>>> ad 3) I completely agree with your disagreement and I dislike the 
>>> RAT report as well ... :-) ... but two thoughts on that : on the one 
>>> hand there are already exceptions defined in the RAT report 
>>> generation on the other hand some guys are pretty stubborn regarding 
>>> RAT report violation - they have somehow the tendency to skip 
>>> interpreting the RAT report and complain about it which could cause 
>>> a RC to fail. I had too many rejected RC with Apache Commons ...
>>>
>>> Conclusion - 1) was my mistake, I have a major issue with 2) and 
>>> minor issue with 3)
>>>
>>> Still on -1
>>>
>>> Hope you understand me reasoning
>>>
>>> Siegfried Goeschl
>>>
>>> On 09.11.12 21:54, Florian Holeczek wrote:
>>>> Hi Siegfried,
>>>>
>>>> first, thanks for having had a thorough look at the stuff!
>>>>
>>>>> 1) [Major] when I deploy the exploded WAR to my local Tomcat the 
>>>>> "Find Pages" in the left hand navigation does not work -  it shows 
>>>>> an non-existing Wiki page instead of opening a search page - I 
>>>>> tried with the LuceneSearchProvider and the BasicSearchProvider 
>>>>> but it does not work. I did not see any error message in 
>>>>> jspwiki.log but the fulltext search DOES work when using the 
>>>>> "Quick Navigation"
>>>>
>>>> you're probably using an old wiki page set, so this is expected 
>>>> behaviour. Please see 
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JSPWIKI-664
>>>>
>>>>> 2) [Major] when running "ant guitests" 17 out of my 962 test fail. 
>>>>> Could be some missing configuration I'm not aware of but I would 
>>>>> expect all tests to pass ... ;-)
>>>>
>>>> The guitests target is not part of the build sequence for good 
>>>> reasons :-)
>>>>
>>>>> 3) [Minor] The RAT report could appreciate a few more exceptions 
>>>>> to get rid of the "17 Unknown Licenses"
>>>>
>>>> I completely disagree in this point - The RAT report is nothing one 
>>>> will want to tell "Great, all fine!", in order to print it out and 
>>>> decorate some wall. Instead, it's only a helper tool that is meant 
>>>> to generate a good, unfiltered overview of reality. It's then up to 
>>>> the reader to interpret its contents.
>>>> Putting exceptions into it means that you lose control over the 
>>>> ignored files and risk to oversee relevant issues in later 
>>>> modifications of these files.
>>>>
>>>>> Can anyone double-check? Currently (see 1+2) my vote is
>>>>>
>>>>> [ ] +1 Approve the release
>>>>> [X] -1 Disapprove the release (please provide specific comments)
>>>>
>>>> The only issue IMO is no. 2 - but it's a minor issue that should 
>>>> not be blocking a release. WDYT?
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Florian
>>>
>>
>> Craig L Russell
>> Architect, Oracle
>> http://db.apache.org/jdo
>> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
>> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>>
>


Mime
View raw message