Thanks for putting together a 3.1.1 RC!
I'm afraid my vote is: -1 (non-binding) because of broken initializers and confusing LICENSE in source archive. Checked: + GPG signatures + source zip matches git commit; adds only (empty) DEPENDENCIES and dependency-reduced-pom.xml - Hashes - you didn't provide dist svn revision or its sha1 hashes, I'll assume rev 16841 - repository JARs/POMs; broken initializers? - LICENSE; confusing, see below 0 NOTICE; see below +1 binaries/apache-jena-3.1.1.tar.gz riot tested with json-ld +1 binaries/apache-jena-fuseki-2.4.1.tar.gz tested with tdb, json-ld upload and sparql +1 mvn install -DskipTests=true +1 mvn clean install (50 minutes!) -1 outdated jackson -1 wrong semantic versioning I am failing this RC as I was unable to use the build artifacts from Commons RDF 0.3.0-SNAPSHOT (master), which works fine with Jena 3.1.0. This seems to be the case both with jena-osgi or with apache-jena-libs <dependency> To replicate, try do "mvn clean install -l api,simple,jena" in https://github.com/stain/incubator-commonsrdf/tree/jena-3.1.1-rc2 Something wrong with the initializers or an internal dependency missing from a pom.xml somewhere..? I'll see what I can figure out and raise in JIRA. JSON-LD is working, however in jena-parent/pom.xm <!-- Used by jena-osgi and must be in-step with jsonldjava --> <ver.jackson>2.6.3</ver.jackson> but the newer jsonld-java 0.8.4 (claims to) need jackson 2.7.4: https://github.com/jsonld-java/jsonld-java/blob/v0.8.3/pom.xml#L44 This might break under OSGi (but I haven't tested, so not a blocker). T E S T S ------------------------------------------------------- Running org.apache.commons.rdf.jena.TestGraphJena Tests run: 10, Failures: 0, Errors: 2, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 7.327 sec <<< FAILURE! - in org.apache.commons.rdf.jena.TestGraphJena addBlankNodesFromMultipleGraphs(org.apache.commons.rdf.jena.TestGraphJena) Time elapsed: 6.657 sec <<< ERROR! java.lang.ExceptionInInitializerError Caused by: org.apache.jena.sparql.ARQException: Context key is null whyJavaStreamsMightNotTakeOverFromSparql(org.apache.commons.rdf.jena.TestGraphJena) Time elapsed: 0.041 sec <<< ERROR! java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError Caused by: java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: Could not initialize class org.apache.jena.riot.out.NodeFmtLib Running org.apache.commons.rdf.jena.TestJenaGraphToCommonsRDFGraph Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.336 sec <<< FAILURE! - in org.apache.commons.rdf.jena.TestJenaGraphToCommonsRDFGraph jenaToCommonsRDF(org.apache.commons.rdf.jena.TestJenaGraphToCommonsRDFGraph) Time elapsed: 0.314 sec <<< ERROR! java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: Could not initialize class org.apache.jena.sparql.ARQConstants at org.apache.commons.rdf.jena.TestJenaGraphToCommonsRDFGraph.jenaToCommonsRDF(TestJenaGraphToCommonsRDFGraph.java:63) By changing to jena-osgi 3.1.1 in https://github.com/apache/incubator-commonsrdf (jena.version in pom.xml) and adding https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachejena-1015/ as staging repository. I get the same errors if instead if instead of jena-osgi I try to use: <dependency> <groupId>org.apache.jena</groupId> <artifactId>apache-jena-libs</artifactId> <version>${jena.version}</version> <type>pom</type> </dependency> And again the same error if I use the locally mvn install-ed JARs. Is an internal dependency missing? Not sure if this warning when building jena-osgi is related: [WARNING] Bundle org.apache.jena:jena-osgi:bundle:3.1.1 : Split package, multiple jars provide the same package:org/apache/jena/system Use Import/Export Package directive -split-package:=(merge-first|merge-last|error|first) to get rid of this warning Package found in [Jar:jena-arq, Jar:jena-core] Class path [Jar:., Jar:jena-arq, Jar:jena-core, Jar:xercesImpl, Jar:commons-cli, Jar:jena-base, Jar:collection, Jar:org.apache.servicemix.bundles.xerces, Jar:xml-apis, Jar:jena-shaded-guava, Jar:guava, Jar:jena-tdb, Jar:jena-iri, Jar:httpclient-osgi, Jar:httpcore-osgi, Jar:jsonld-java, Jar:jackson-core, Jar:jackson-databind, Jar:jackson-annotations, Jar:commons-io, Jar:commons-csv, Jar:libthrift, Jar:jcl-over-slf4j, Jar:slf4j-api, Jar:commons-lang3, Jar:org.osgi.core, Jar:slf4j-log4j12, Jar:log4j] [WARNING] Bundle org.apache.jena:jena-osgi:bundle:3.1.1 : Unused Import-Package instructions: [org.apache.xml.*] Another thing, LICENSE file of jena-3.1.1-source-release.zip says > The following files contain code contributed by Plugged In Software: > > src/main/java/org/apache/jena/rdf/arp/ExtendedHandler.java > src/main/java/org/apache/jena/rdf/arp/impl/XMLHandler.java > src/main/java/org/apache/jena/rdf/arp/ARP.java but the correct file paths are presumably these under jena-core/ and in different packages: jena-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jena/rdfxml/xmlinput/ExtendedHandler.java jena-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jena/rdfxml/xmlinput/impl/XMLHandler.java jena-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jena/rdfxml/xmlinput/ARP.java I wonder why these files have BOTH the Apache license and BSD license.. particularly with the confusing "see end of line for BSD license" comment at the top. I presume this means they also include substantial ASF contributions (beyond adding a header) as otherwise the policy normally is to leave the file at its original license? Why is the BSD license at the end? This is not a showstopper for this RC as the files (which have the same filename, just wrong path) also include the BSD license text, just some paths to fix for later. However I am not to keen with the very end of the LICENSE file: > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > Copyright (c) 2004-2009 Mort Bay Consulting Pty. Ltd. > > All rights reserved. This program and the accompanying materials > are made available under the terms of the Eclipse Public License v1.0 > and Apache License v2.0 which accompanies this distribution. > > The Eclipse Public License is available at > http://www.eclipse.org/legal/epl-v10.html > The Apache License v2.0 is available at > http://www.opensource.org/licenses/apache2.0.php This sounds wrong to me. What is it that is (c) 2004-2009 Mort Bay? And where is the Eclipse Public License "which accompanies this distribution"? Why is the Apache license linked to at www.opensource.org rather than the text above in the file or the canonical www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0? Also if it is here used only under the Apache license, why do we also say that "this program" (Jena?) is under Eclipse Public License, when presumably only some of the files are? Related in NOTICE: > Apache Jena > Copyright 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 The Apache Software Foundation > .. > - Copyright 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 > Hewlett-Packard Development Company, LP I guess no need to list all the years, 2011-2016 and 2001-2009 would suffice. > This product includes software developed by > PluggedIn Software under a BSD license. Was this originally in NOTICE pre Apache? It should not need to be listed in NOTICE as well - particularly as "includes software" is all-inclusive - if it's just those three files then without noting that, these notice line has to be propagated by downstream even when they are irrelevant. Just another plea for a bit of Semantic Versioning.. http://semver.org/ I ran japicmp on jena-core, which highlights these potential breaking changes from 3.1.0: https://gist.github.com/stain/175df0c62d6cac451d35ab11f90a7ab6 Do we have a changelog for these..? (Ignoring impls) I would have called this version 3.2.0 instead - I remember several times when a "patch" update of Jena has lots of big changes in other code; I guess after 6 months of hard work we can't aim for patch compatibility anymore so it's just fair to go for 3.2.0 even if there's nothing new politically. For archival purposes, these are the sha1sums from dist 16841 which I assume are the ones that are candidates of this vote. 153605cbfc13f399cb362bec59fee1d08b640e67 source/jena-3.1.1-source-release.zip 57a2b65ddcc01d386d09dceaf576188f49c66fe0 binaries/apache-jena-3.1.1.zip 45015ea71a312d92a0b23a454b36aed8ea46e3e2 binaries/apache-jena-fuseki-2.4.1.zip 3adcaf35eb0d9be850cfa2f9e4fae7e5db6ac9b6 binaries/jena-fuseki1-1.4.1-distribution.zip a47ede6aad31cde586f33a0b22389bff91257543 binaries/apache-jena-3.1.1.tar.gz d9d73ef66eaec85af1f7939aaa79bf8546a0a493 binaries/apache-jena-fuseki-2.4.1.tar.gz 70bf6c6ed2534da9b13a979cdeb5caf557552d68 binaries/jena-fuseki1-1.4.1-distribution.tar.gz Build tested on Ubuntu 16.04 x64 with: Apache Maven 3.3.9 (bb52d8502b132ec0a5a3f4c09453c07478323dc5; 2015-11-10T16:41:47+00:00) Maven home: /home/stain/software/maven Java version: 1.8.0_91, vendor: Oracle Corporation Java home: /usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/jre Default locale: en_GB, platform encoding: UTF-8 OS name: "linux", version: "4.4.0-45-generic", arch: "amd64", family: "unix" On 4 November 2016 at 22:43, Andy Seaborne <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > Here is a vote on a release of Jena 3.1.1 > (with Fuseki 2.4.1 and Fuseki 1.4.1). > > This is the second proposed candidate for this release. > > ** My signing key has changed - to verify, use the key in ** > ** https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jena/dist/KEYS ** > ** for [email protected]. ** > > * Dependency changes: > > New module: > jena-fuseki2/jena-fuseki-embedded > > Updates: > com.github.jsonld-java:jsonld-java 0.7.0 -> 0.8.3 > > org.apache.httpcomponents:httpClient 4.2.6 -> 4.5.2 > org.apache.httpcomponents:httpCache 4.2.6 -> 4.5.2 > org.apache.httpcomponents:httpCore 4.2.5 -> 4.4.4 > > com.jayway.awaitility:awaitility 1.6.4 -> 1.7.0 > com.spatial4j:spatial4j 0.4.1 -> 0.5 > org.slf4j:* 1.7.20 -> 1.7.21 > commons-codec:commons-codec 1.9 -> 1.10 > org.apache.commons:commons-collections4 4.0 -> 4.1 > org.apache.commons:commons-csv 1.0 -> 1.3 > org.apache.commons:commons-lang3 3.3.2 -> 3.4 > org.apache.thrift:libthrift 0.9.2 -> 0.9.3 > org.apache.mrunit:mrunit 1.0.0 -> 1.1.0 > com.github.rvesse:airline 2.1.0 -> 2.1.1 > > > Key features of the release: > > * Improve JSON-LD output > JENA-1208 - François-Paul Servant > http://jena.staging.apache.org/documentation/io/rdf-output.html#json-ld > > * Completed F&O XPath3 functions > JENA-508 - Alessandro Seganti > > * ComplexPhraseQueryParser > JENA-1180 - Andrew Dolby > > * Additional vocabularies (DCAT, VoID, ROV, ORG) > JENA-1206 - Bart Hanssens > > * Improvement to the Fuseki service script for RHEL/Centos 6. > JENA-1219 - Dan Pritts > > * ORDER BY now cancelable. > > * Txn : a highlevel API for working with transactions > http://jena.staging.apache.org/documentation/txn/txn.html > > * Embedded Fuseki > http://jena.staging.apache.org/documentation/fuseki2/fuseki-embedded.html > > * Property path speed ups (JENA-1195) > > * Upgrade to Apache HttpClient v4.3 API > => auth changes cause API changes. > > > Everyone, not just committers, is invited to test and vote. > > Staging repository: > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachejena-1015/ > > Proposed dist/ area: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/jena/ > > Keys: > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jena/dist/KEYS > ** NB signing key has changed. > > > Git commit (browser URL): > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/jena/commit/f7b3c416 > > Git Commit Hash: > f7b3c416328bba4b8044e4ea8ad80e09ac51d720 > > Git Commit Tag: > jena-3.1.1-rc2 > > Please vote to approve this release: > > [ ] +1 Approve the release > [ ] 0 Don't care > [ ] -1 Don't release, because ... > > This vote will be open to at least > > Monday, 7 Nov 2016, 23:59 UTC > > If you expect to check the release but the 72 hour limit does not work > for you, please email within the schedule above with an expected time > and we can extend the vote period. > > Thanks, > > Andy > > Checking needed: > > + does everything work on Linux? > + does everything work on MS Windows? > + does everything work on OS X? > + are the GPG signatures fine? > + are the checksums correct? > + is there a source archive? > + can the source archive really be built? > + is there a correct LICENSE and NOTICE file in each artifact > (both source and binary artifacts)? > + does the NOTICE file contain all necessary attributions? > + have any licenses of dependencies changed due to upgrades? > if so have LICENSE and NOTICE been upgraded appropriately? > + does the tag/commit in the SCM contain reproducible sources? -- Stian Soiland-Reyes http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
