lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shai Erera <ser...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Lucene/Solr release 3.2 (take 2)
Date Tue, 31 May 2011 12:01:48 GMT
I checked sums and sigs, ran tests and briefly scanned CHANGES, README etc.

One thing I found is that the 'src' package includes an "index.html" and a
"docs" folder. If you load index.html in the browser, almost all the links
work, except for the Javadocs, because they are not part of the 'src'
package (which is ok). But then if you "ant javadocs", they are created
under "build/docs" and not "docs". so links still don't work.

I don't think it's a showstopper b/c the docs work fine in the binary
release, though it'd be good if we can fix that somehow for future releases.
I don't like inconsistencies. Maybe we should remove all "docs" and generate
them by an Ant target?

Anyway, given that, here is my +1 for RC2.

Shai

On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Doron Cohen <cdoronc@gmail.com> wrote:

> Man this is impressive!
> Thanks for fixing all the issues!
>
> +1 for 3.2 rc2.
>
> What I checked:
> * signatures and sums on package files (solr, lucene)
> * compared src to bin packages (solr, lucene)
> * tests with ant (solr, lucene)
> * demo (solr)
> * docs glimpse (lucene)
>
> A thought for future releases:
> * single src package (currently solr packs both lucene and solr in the src
> pack)
>
> Doron
>
>
> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Steven A Rowe <sarowe@syr.edu> wrote:
>
>> Holy crap, Robert, you cranked through a huge number of issues to put this
>> out.  Kudos!
>>
>> I'll take a look at RC2 in the next couple of days.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Robert Muir [mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com]
>> > Sent: Monday, May 30, 2011 11:54 PM
>> > To: dev@lucene.apache.org
>> > Subject: [VOTE] Lucene/Solr release 3.2 (take 2)
>> >
>> > Please vote to release the artifacts at http://s.apache.org/lusolr32rc2
>> > as 3.2.0
>> >
>> > Changes from rc1 are mostly packaging issues that testers found:
>> > * SOLR-2557       ensure example configuration files have the correct
>> > LUCENE_MATCH_VERSION
>> > * SOLR-2558       remove "apache lucene version" from solr changes.txt
>> > "Versions of major components"
>> > * SOLR-2559       All solr contrib/*/CHANGES.txt have "3.2-dev" as the
>> > release header.
>> > * LUCENE-3009     binary packaging: lucene modules/contribs that
>> > depend on jars are confusing
>> > * LUCENE-3154     remove version references from the versioned website
>> > * LUCENE-3155     possibly improve includes/excludes for packages files
>> > * LUCENE-3156     remove references to contribs that dont exist from
>> docs
>> > * LUCENE-3157     packaging is sometimes .tar.gz, sometimes .tgz
>> > * LUCENE-3158     ensure binary artifacts contain the necessary
>> licensing
>> > files
>> > * LUCENE-3159     lucene benchmark has some unnecessary files
>> > * LUCENE-3160     lucene source build doesn't work correctly by itself
>> > from the src dist
>> > * LUCENE-3161     consider warnings from the source compilation
>> > * LUCENE-3162     NOTICE.txt refers to .jar files which are not
>> > included in the binary archives.
>> > * LUCENE-3163     CHANGES.txt has no release date for 3.1.0
>> > * Included Changes2Html output
>> > * KEYS files in both releases (also registered my key with
>> id.apache.org)
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>
>>
>

Mime
View raw message