+1, that reads much better!

 

I was about to write something similar, although I did this for German already. 
Once it is out it will appear as news article. Just waiting for the release!

 

Uwe

 

-----

Uwe Schindler

Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen

http://www.thetaphi.de <http://www.thetaphi.de/> 

eMail: [email protected]

 

From: Jan Høydahl [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2017 1:51 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts

 

I think the (Solr) release notes feels more like a dump of JIRA descriptions 
than an editorial summary of main highlights.

People who want to dive deep can read CHANGES, let’s choose top-7 largest 
changes, describe them editorially and refer to CHANGES for the rest including 
upgrade notes?

 

I made a total re-write here 
https://gist.github.com/3afd5095834ee9e5d60b2eb304c21bec including a general 
warning at the end that this is a major release that removes deprecated stuff 
and that you should read the upgrade notes.

Anshum, feel free to disagree and discard or use at will!

 

--
Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com <http://www.cominvent.com> 

 

19. sep. 2017 kl. 22.44 skrev Anshum Gupta <[email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]> >:

 

Please find the release notes here:

 

Lucene: https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ReleaseNote70

 

Solr: https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ReleaseNote70 

 

I am cleaning up the ‘upgrading from 6x’ section to make it shorter but feel 
free to either fix/add things to this. I pushed the artifacts last night so 
there are still about 8 hours to the 24 hours period. 

 

I’ll use the 8 hours to fix the website etc. and announce once all of this is 
wrapped up!

 

-Anshum

 

 

 

On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:46 PM, Varun Thacker <[email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]> > wrote:

 

I don't think holding up the release process infinitely till we stabilize all 
the tests is an option. On the other hand getting an RC to build is pretty 
difficult ( I am facing the same problem with 6.6.1 ) and I am sure people will 
run into this while voting for the release?

 

We could identify the top 2/3 tests which fail regularly while building the RC 
and either disable them or see if someone volunteers to fix them ?

 

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 2:53 AM, Ishan Chattopadhyaya 
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote:

> Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into failures 
> when

> checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0 branch so that 
> building

> and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody working on this release?

+1. If it is hampering the release process, I think we should either not 
release without fixing them, or disable them for release (building, verifying).

 

On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Anshum Gupta <[email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]> > wrote:

Though those failing tests are annoying, I would not recommend ignoring those 
tests. We can manually ignore those test failures when we are testing stuff out 
though.

 

-Anshum

 

 

 

On Aug 28, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Adrien Grand <[email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]> > wrote:

 

Those flaky Solr tests are annoying since people will also run into failures 
when checking the RC? Should we disable these tests on the 7.0 branch so that 
building and verifying this RC isn't annoying to everybody working on this 
release?

 

Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 19:23, Anshum Gupta <[email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]> > a écrit :

Thanks Adrien! It worked with a fresh clone, at least ant check-licenses 
worked, so I’m assuming the RC creation would work too.

I’m running that, and it might take a couple of hours for me to create one, as 
a few SolrCloud tests are still a little flakey and they fail occasionally.

 

-Anshum

 

 

 

On Aug 28, 2017, at 10:13 AM, Anshum Gupta <[email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]> > wrote:

 

Adrien,

 

Yes, ant check-licenses fails with the same error, and so does ant validate 
(from the root dir). This is after running ant clean -f.

 

BUILD FAILED

/Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following error occurred 
while executing this line:

/Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The following error 
occurred while executing this line:

/Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62: JAR 
resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar

 

I didn’t realize that the dependency was upgraded, and what confuses me is that 
the file actually exists.

 

anshum$ ls analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-5

icu4j-56.1.jar  icu4j-59.1.jar

 

It seems like it’s something that git clean, ant clean clean-jars etc. didn’t 
fix. This is really surprising but I’ll try and checking out again and creating 
and RC (after checking for the dependencies).

I think ant should be responsible for cleaning this up, and not git so there’s 
something off there.

 

-Anshum

 

 

 

On Aug 28, 2017, at 8:51 AM, Adrien Grand <[email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]> > wrote:

 

You mentioned you tried to run the script multiple times. Have you run git 
clean at some point? Maybe this is due to a stale working copy?

 

Le lun. 28 août 2017 à 08:53, Adrien Grand <[email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]> > a écrit :

Hi Anshum,

Does running ant check-licenses from the Lucene directory fail as well? The 
error message that you are getting looks weird to me since Lucene 7.0 depends 
on ICU 59.1, not 56.1 since https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7540.

 

Le ven. 25 août 2017 à 23:42, Anshum Gupta <[email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]> > a écrit :

A quick question, in case someone has an idea around what’s going on. When I 
run the following command:

 

python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/buildAndPushRelease.py --push-local 
/Users/anshum/solr/release/7.0.0/rc0 --rc-num 1 --sign <my-key>

 

I end up with the following error:

 

BUILD FAILED

/Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/build.xml:117: The following error occurred 
while executing this line:

/Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/build.xml:90: The following error 
occurred while executing this line:

/Users/anshum/workspace/lucene-solr/lucene/tools/custom-tasks.xml:62: JAR 
resource does not exist: analysis/icu/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar

 

Any idea as to what’s going on? This generally fails after the tests have run, 
and the script has processed for about 45 minutes and it’s consistent i.e. all 
the times when the tests pass, the process fails with this warning.

 

I can also confirm that this file exists at 
lucene/analysis/icy/lib/icu4j-56.1.jar .

 

Has anyone else seen this when working on the release?

 

-Anshum

 

 

 

On Aug 23, 2017, at 4:21 AM, Andrzej Białecki <[email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]> > wrote:

 

 

On 23 Aug 2017, at 13:06, Uwe Schindler <[email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]> > wrote:

 

Keep in mind that there is also branch_7_0.

 

Right, but the changes related to these issues were committed to master before 
branch_7_0 was created, and these specific issues are only about back-porting 
to 6x.






Uww

Am 23. August 2017 12:26:42 MESZ schrieb "Andrzej Białecki" <[email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]> >:

 

On 23 Aug 2017, at 08:15, Anshum Gupta <[email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]> > wrote:

 

I also found more issues when comparing 7x, with 6x this time. I’ll take a look 
at wether it’s just the CHANGES entries or have these actually missed the 
branch. I assume it’s just the CHANGES, but want to be sure. If the committers 
involved can pitch in, I’d appreciate, else I’ll work on this for a bit right 
now and continue with this tomorrow morning.

 

- SOLR-10477 (Ab)

 

This is a partial back-port of relevant improvements from master to 6x, so 
there are no strictly corresponding commits on 7x/master.





- SOLR-10631: Metric reporters leak on 6x. (Ab)

 

This one has been fixed as part of other related issues in branches 7.x / 
master, so it only required a specific fix for 6x.





- SOLR-10000 (Ab)

 

 

This has been committed first to 7x, then to 6x and it’s present in branch_6_6.

 

---

Best regards,

 

Andrzej Bialecki

 


--
Uwe Schindler
Achterdiek 19, 28357 Bremen
https://www.thetaphi.de <https://www.thetaphi.de/> 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reply via email to