I see that the test was changed yesterday, and perhaps it causes the
problem? Previously, the test had that code:
// r might have changed because this is not a
// synchronized method. However we don't want
// to make it synchronized to test
// thread-safety of IndexReader.close().
// That's why we add refreshed also to
// readersToClose, because double closing is fine
if (refreshed != r) {
refreshed.close();
}
readersToClose.add(refreshed);
And Mike changed it to:
if (refreshed != r) {
refreshed.close();
}
--> Removing the comment + adding refreshed to readersToClose. Maybe adding
refreshed is still necessary?
I wasn't able to reproduce it on my environment though, so I'm not sure.
Anyway, besides that change, the rest of the changes seem harmless and
unrelated to the break (this one might not be related either, but it stands
out as a potential problem).
Shai
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 4:40 AM, Apache Hudson Server <
hud...@hudson.apache.org> wrote:
> _1e_3.tis=1,
