rcX suffixes are intentionally left out of build artifacts. This way
once a rc passes a vote the release process is just a rename of the
build artifact to remove the -rcX from the filename. If -rcX was
actually inside a build artifact then it requires a source change and a
rebuild to remove it, which means what people voted on and tested isn't
exactly the same as what is actually released.
I agree commit hashes are useful information, but makes build
reproducibility more difficult. We originally had them in Daffodil and
removed them for the this reason and it hasn't been an issue, just takes
a little more care to know what you're using.
On 3/22/22 1:05 PM, Adam Rosien wrote:
If the version number is the identifier that summarizes the build artifact
then the reported version above would be inaccurate as the actual version
was 1.0.0-rc2. Probably an oversight on the Scala-side of the build of the
extension.
I would argue, however, that the commit hash is useful optional information
to validate an artifact. I was hoping to be able to include the archive
hash, but can see the circularity of that :(
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 9:23 AM Steve Lawrence <slawre...@apache.org> wrote:
The commit hash is intentional. The issue with including a githash is
you get a different build when building outside of git. For
reproducibility, we want to be able to have the exact same builds
regardless of git vs no git.
On 3/22/22 12:16 PM, Adam Rosien wrote:
I have successfully hit a breakpoint on an included file using the
1.0.0-rc2 candidate extension:
- Breakpoint at EDIFACT-SupplyChain-Segments-D.03B.xsd (a schema file
included from the -Messages file), line 380
- Data file INVOIC_D.03B_Interchange_with_UNA.txt
FYI the backend doesn't appear to log its commit hash or build date info
like it used to, it only shows:
```
2022-03-22 09:05:02,213 [io-compute-1] INFO o.a.d.d.d.DAPodil -
******************************************************
A DAP server for debugging Daffodil schema processors.
Build info:
version: 1.0.0
daffodilVersion: 3.2.1
scalaVersion: 2.12.13
sbtVersion: 1.5.1
******************************************************
```
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 9:06 AM Adam Rosien <a...@rosien.net> wrote:
Ah a necessary
"daffodilDebugClasspath": ""
was missing from my launch config. Confirmed backend launches...
debugging
continues....
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 8:58 AM Adam Rosien <a...@rosien.net> wrote:
I installed the vsix file from
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/daffodil/daffodil-vscode/1.0.0-rc2/bin/
and set up a launch configuration (included below) based on the EDIFACT
schema at https://github.com/DFDLSchemas/EDIFACT. When running the
session I get a popup with the following error, which I assume is from
the
Daffodil VSCode extension:
Cannot read property 'includes' of undefined
No backend seems to have been launched, so I assume this message is
from
the extension itself, and I couldn't find any other logs or messages
about
the state of the extension :(. Any ideas?
Launch config:
{
"request": "launch",
"type": "dfdl",
"name": "EDIFACT multi-file",
"program":
"${workspaceFolder}/main/resources/EDIFACT-SupplyChain-D03B/EDIFACT-SupplyChain-Messages-D.03B.xsd",
"data":
"${workspaceFolder}/test/resources/EDIFACT-SupplyChain-D03B/TestData/INVOIC_D.03B_Interchange_with_UNA.txt",
"debugServer": 4711,
"infosetOutput": {
"type": "console",
"path": "${workspaceFolder}/infoset.xml"
},
"trace": true,
"stopOnEntry": true,
"useExistingServer": false,
"openHexView": false,
"openInfosetView": false,
"openInfosetDiffView": false
}
On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 12:35 PM Mike Beckerle <mbecke...@apache.org>
wrote:
Since this vote closes sunday, and I won't have further test time
before
then, I have to vote now.
Voting -1
I couldn't get the convenience binary .vsix file to work to debug
EDIFACT
with a breakpoint in the 2nd file of the schema.
I went so far as to uninstall the older extension, shut down vscode,
manually purge the daffodil extension from ~/.vscode/extensions, the
restart vscode and install the new downloaded .vsix file. Verify
~/.vscode/extensions now has the extension in it again.
So I am definitely installing and running the vsix from the
dist.apache.org
site for rc2. Something must be wrong with it.
My next step would be to build my own vsix from source, but I don't
have
time before the Sunday end of vote.
On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 3:06 PM Shane Dell <shanedell...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Hello all,
Ignore the last vote as I did not change my email to the proper one
registered for apache.
I'd like to call a vote to release Apache Daffodil VS Code 1.0.0-rc2.
All distribution packages, including signatures, digests, etc. can be
found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/daffodil/daffodil-vscode/1.0.0-rc2/
This release has been signed with PGP key
86DDE7B41291E380237934F007570D3ADC76D51B, corresponding
to shaned...@apache.org, which is included in the KEYS file here:
https://downloads.apache.org/daffodil/KEYS
The release candidate has been tagged in git with 1.0.0-rc2.
For reference, here is a list of all closed GitHub issues tagged with
1.0.0:
https://github.com/apache/daffodil-vscode/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aclosed+is%3A1.0.0
Please review and vote. The vote will be open for at least 72 hours
(Sunday, 17 March 2022, 12 Noon EST).
[ ] +1 approve
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
Thank you,
- Shane Dell
