Sure, but that package is archived/read-only, GPLv3. with 3 watchers and 1 star.
On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 4:27 AM Jan Høydahl <jan....@cominvent.com> wrote: > > Let's just follow the spec and move on. > > Just tested this python package, which has no problem parsing the problematic > manifest https://pypi.org/project/jarmanifest/ > > >>> manifest.getAttributes("/tmp/lucene-manifest.mf") > [{'implementationversion': '9.0.0-SNAPSHOT > de45b68c909815ce5ea7b6b9e1a2ce3375b6334d [snapshot build, details omitted]'}] > > Jan > > 17. sep. 2021 kl. 09:32 skrev Dawid Weiss <dawid.we...@gmail.com>: > > > We could do a few things to keep everyone happy - > > 1) keep abbreviated hash in the Implementat-Version and use a separate > manifest entry to store a full hash. > 2) use a longer version for git show (abbrev=num) so that the chance of > collisions in the future is minimized. It's still not a full hash but a > long(er) forced prefix. > > D. > > On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 12:21 AM Chris Hostetter <hossman_luc...@fucit.org> > wrote: >> >> >> : I was referring to doing this with languages other than java. >> : >> : I'm also assuming that exceeding this limit is going to cause indirect >> : hassles for users of lucene, e.g. breaking various security / supply >> : chain tools. We know a lot of these are total crap but people in the >> : corporate world have to suffer under them. >> >> Just to be clear -- our 'Implementation-Version:' has been exceeding the >> 72 byte "single line" limit for a LOOOOONG time -- worrying about how >> "security / supply chain" tools will handle parsing that line now seems >> kind of silly... >> >> If tools can't handle a line wrap in the 8.10 jars, then they haven't >> been able to handle the line wrap since we switched from svn to git (when >> the Implementation Version values switched from being based svn version# >> to git sha) >> >> The *ONLY* thing that's new here is where in the value the line wrap >> happens (with 8.10.0 it happens in the middle of the SHA) and that our >> smoketest tool isn't smart enough to parse the values properly. >> >> This is not even the first time we've even had a conversation about the >> smoke tester and Implementation Version line wraps: LUCENE-7023. >> >> >> : Its super-easy to use a short hash here and avoid problems. >> >> >> There is however an actual and practical downside to switching our >> implementation version to using a "short" SHA, and that's that we would >> lose the ability to garuntee that the information in the >> Implementation-Version uniquely identifies what commit a given jar was >> built from. Multiple commits with the same short(end) hash are possible >> -- Multiple commits with identical (full) commits is not. >> >> Folks may think that using git tags is useful enough for figuring this >> out from official releases, but being able to look at the jar metadata >> from arbitrary builds off of arbitrary branches and sanity check where >> exactly they come from has been very useful to me for 10+ years. >> >> >> : On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 3:03 AM Dawid Weiss <dawid.we...@gmail.com> wrote: >> : > >> : > Jar command doesn't have it, true. But it's fairly trivial to do, even >> : > with an inline snippet like this one? >> : > >> : > public class PrintManifest { >> : > public static void main(String[] jars) throws IOException { >> : > for (var jar : jars) { >> : > var manifest = new JarFile(Paths.get(jar).toFile()).getManifest(); >> : > var attrs = manifest.getMainAttributes(); >> : > System.out.println(jar + ": " + >> attrs.getValue("Implementation-Version")); >> : > } >> : > } >> : > } >> : > >> : > I have this in my lucene-core-9.0.0-SNAPSHOT.jar: >> : > >> : > Implementation-Version: 9.0.0-SNAPSHOT de45b68c909815ce5ea7b6b9e1a2ce337 >> : > 5b6334d [snapshot build, details omitted] >> : > >> : > and running: >> : > >> : > java PrintManifest.java lucene-core-9.0.0-SNAPSHOT.jar >> : > >> : > shows: >> : > >> : > lucene-core-9.0.0-SNAPSHOT.jar: 9.0.0-SNAPSHOT >> : > de45b68c909815ce5ea7b6b9e1a2ce3375b6334d [snapshot build, details >> : > omitted] >> : > >> : > This seems easier to me than trying to remember and keep the length of >> : > that line shorter than an arbitrary limit. >> : > >> : > Dawid >> : > >> : > >> : > On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 9:46 PM Robert Muir <rcm...@gmail.com> wrote: >> : > > >> : > > But its irrelevant that is "valid" when virtually no tools match it. >> : > > >> : > > In other words, I'd agree with you if the "jar" command had some >> : > > ability to read these manifests and print stuff to stdout, e.g. if >> : > > there was ANY interop at all here. >> : > > >> : > > But there isn't. So IMO it makes no sense to cause confusion and chaos >> : > > by adding an unnecessarily long git commit hash. >> : > > >> : > > On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 3:26 PM Dawid Weiss <dawid.we...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> : > > > >> : > > > >> : > > > This is valid manifest line-breaking though... Can we read the >> manifest properly on the smoke tester side somehow (for example, run a Java >> process that reads and extracts the required attribute)? This way we >> wouldn't care about the implementation details of how manifest wraps the >> lines (or escapes characters). >> : > > > >> : > > > D. >> : > > > >> : > > > On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 8:46 PM Mike Drob <md...@mdrob.com> wrote: >> : > > >> >> : > > >> The benchmark jar has the info we need… sort of. When I built it, >> it has: >> : > > >> >> : > > >> Implementation-Version: 8.10.0 >> 75a5061d3715cc5d93c4cbe4f1fa62bf035eea1 >> : > > >> 1 - mdrob - 2021-09-15 11:40:36 >> : > > >> >> : > > >> >> : > > >> and it’s looking for Implementation-Version: 8.10.0 >> 75a5061d3715cc5d93c4cbe4f1fa62bf035eea11 on one line. >> : > > >> >> : > > >> Because 8.10 is a character longer than 8.9, we happen to wrap the >> last character of the git commit sha. From the manifest spec: >> : > > >> >> : > > >> No line may be longer than 72 bytes (not characters), in its >> UTF8-encoded form. >> : > > >> If a value would make the initial line longer than this, it should >> be continued >> : > > >> on extra lines (each starting with a single SPACE). >> : > > >> >> : > > >> And we were already teetering on the edge of that limit. We'll run >> into this problem again in a few years when we try to release version >> 10.0.0, so solving it now has practical benefits down the line. >> : > > >> >> : > > >> There's a few options that I can come up with - >> : > > >> 1. Use the short-hash when we generate the jar >> : > > >> 2. Use the short-hash when we check the contents in the smoke test >> : > > >> 3. Do some line join magic in the smoke test. >> : > > >> >> : > > >> I'm leaning towards number 1 as I feel that would still be unique >> enough for our needs, but would like to hear from others as well. >> : > > >> >> : > > >> On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 9:46 AM Timothy potter >> <thelabd...@gmail.com> wrote: >> : > > >>> >> : > > >>> can someone also please look into that benchmark jar issue? >> : > > >>> >> : > > >>> Sent from my iPhone >> : > > >>> >> : > > >>> On Sep 15, 2021, at 9:44 AM, Nhat Nguyen >> <nhat.ngu...@elastic.co.invalid> wrote: >> : > > >>> >> : > > >>> >> : > > >>> Thanks Mayya and Mike! I will backport it to the 8.10 branch. >> : > > >>> >> : > > >>> On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 10:12 AM Mike Drob <md...@mdrob.com> wrote: >> : > > >>>> >> : > > >>>> I think since Tim is out on vacation, it's probably not too late. >> That looks like a good fix to have, do we know how long the bug has been >> present? >> : > > >>>> >> : > > >>>> On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 7:56 AM Mayya Sharipova >> <mayya.sharip...@elastic.co.invalid> wrote: >> : > > >>>>> >> : > > >>>>> Hello everyone, >> : > > >>>>> We have discovered a bug and fixed a bug in Lucene sort >> optimization (LUCENE-10106) and would like to merge it to Lucene 8.10 if it >> is not too late. >> : > > >>>>> I apologize for the inconvenience, the bug was discovered just >> yesterday. >> : > > >>>>> >> : > > >>>>> On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 9:26 PM Timothy Potter >> <thelabd...@apache.org> wrote: >> : > > >>>>>> >> : > > >>>>>> Ahem ... unfortunately there will not be an 8.10 RC this week. >> I'm >> : > > >>>>>> headed out on vacation tomorrow, back at keys on Monday, Sept 20 >> : > > >>>>>> unless someone else wants to pick up the RM duties before then? >> : > > >>>>>> >> : > > >>>>>> After failing the test suite at various places and other >> weirdness >> : > > >>>>>> like .asc files not getting created, I finally got to the smoke >> test >> : > > >>>>>> part, which is now failing with: >> : > > >>>>>> >> : > > >>>>>> File >> "/Users/tjp/.lucene-releases/8.10.0/lucene-solr/dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", >> : > > >>>>>> line 176, in checkJARMetaData >> : > > >>>>>> raise RuntimeError('%s is missing "%s" inside its >> : > > >>>>>> META-INF/MANIFEST.MF (wrong git revision?)' % \ >> : > > >>>>>> RuntimeError: JAR file >> : > > >>>>>> >> "/Users/tjp/.lucene-releases/8.10.0/RC1/smoketest/unpack/lucene-8.10.0/benchmark/lucene-benchmark-8.10.0.jar" >> : > > >>>>>> is missing "Implementation-Version: 8.10.0 >> : > > >>>>>> ecf5c747e6df418dd05a18af327c20051f0584d7" inside its >> : > > >>>>>> META-INF/MANIFEST.MF (wrong git revision?) >> : > > >>>>>> >> : > > >>>>>> FWIW, I verified that the other Lucene JAR files have this line >> in >> : > > >>>>>> them, such as core: >> : > > >>>>>> >> : > > >>>>>> Manifest-Version: 1.0 >> : > > >>>>>> Ant-Version: Apache Ant 1.9.15 >> : > > >>>>>> Created-By: 1.8.0_265-b01 (AppleJDK-8.0.265.1.1) >> : > > >>>>>> Extension-Name: org.apache.lucene >> : > > >>>>>> Specification-Title: Lucene Search Engine: core >> : > > >>>>>> Specification-Version: 8.10.0 >> : > > >>>>>> Specification-Vendor: The Apache Software Foundation >> : > > >>>>>> Implementation-Title: org.apache.lucene >> : > > >>>>>> Implementation-Version: 8.10.0 >> ecf5c747e6df418dd05a18af327c20051f0584d >> : > > >>>>>> 7 - tjp - 2021-09-14 19:08:42 >> : > > >>>>>> Implementation-Vendor: The Apache Software Foundation >> : > > >>>>>> X-Compile-Source-JDK: 8 >> : > > >>>>>> X-Compile-Target-JDK: 8 >> : > > >>>>>> Multi-Release: true >> : > > >>>>>> >> : > > >>>>>> On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 1:21 PM Ishan Chattopadhyaya >> : > > >>>>>> <ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: >> : > > >>>>>> > >> : > > >>>>>> > All the best, this is the worst step. >> : > > >>>>>> > >> : > > >>>>>> > On Tue, 14 Sep, 2021, 10:47 pm Timothy Potter, >> <thelabd...@gmail.com> wrote: >> : > > >>>>>> >> >> : > > >>>>>> >> Building RC1 now ... stay tuned. >> : > > >>>>>> >> >> : > > >>>>>> >> On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 2:30 PM Timothy Potter >> <thelabd...@gmail.com> wrote: >> : > > >>>>>> >> > >> : > > >>>>>> >> > Thanks for the update Mike! >> : > > >>>>>> >> > >> : > > >>>>>> >> > I'm backporting SOLR-15620 right now and am cooking up a >> quick PR for >> : > > >>>>>> >> > SOLR-15621, which looks like an easy win for the issue >> Cassandra >> : > > >>>>>> >> > reported on Slack earlier today. >> : > > >>>>>> >> > >> : > > >>>>>> >> > Cheers, >> : > > >>>>>> >> > Tim >> : > > >>>>>> >> > >> : > > >>>>>> >> > On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 11:32 AM Mike Drob >> <md...@apache.org> wrote: >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > Hi Tim, I'm still working on SOLR-15555, the code and >> benchmarking >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > both look pretty good, but I've got a few last unit >> tests that I need >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > to chase down. Hopefully taken care of by today or >> tomorrow, I'll be >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > sure to keep you updated though. >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 11:39 AM Timothy Potter >> <thelabd...@gmail.com> wrote: >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > I found >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15620 while testing >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > the schema designer. I haven't built the RC yet, so >> going to see if I >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > can get this in today. >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 12:36 PM Timothy Potter >> <thelabd...@apache.org> wrote: >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > NOTICE: >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > Branch branch_8_10 has been cut and versions updated >> to 8.11 on stable branch. >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > Please observe the normal rules: >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > * No new features may be committed to the branch. >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > * Documentation patches, build patches and serious >> bug fixes may be >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > committed to the branch. However, you should >> submit all patches you >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > want to commit to Jira first to give others the >> chance to review >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > and possibly vote against the patch. Keep in mind >> that it is our >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > main intention to keep the branch as stable as >> possible. >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > * All patches that are intended for the branch >> should first be committed >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > to the unstable branch, merged into the stable >> branch, and then into >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > the current release branch. >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > * Normal unstable and stable branch development may >> continue as usual. >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > However, if you plan to commit a big change to the >> unstable branch >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > while the branch feature freeze is in effect, >> think twice: can't the >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > addition wait a couple more days? Merges of bug >> fixes into the branch >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > may become more difficult. >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > * Only Jira issues with Fix version 8.10 and >> priority "Blocker" will delay >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > a release candidate build. >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > ---- >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: >> dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: >> dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: >> dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >> : > > >>>>>> >> > > >> : > > >>>>>> >> >> : > > >>>>>> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> : > > >>>>>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@solr.apache.org >> : > > >>>>>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@solr.apache.org >> : > > >>>>>> >> >> : > > >>>>>> >> : > > >>>>>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> : > > >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >> : > > >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >> : > > >>>>>> >> : > > >> : > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> : > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@solr.apache.org >> : > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@solr.apache.org >> : > > >> : > >> : > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> : > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >> : > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >> : > >> : >> : --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> : To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >> : For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >> : >> : >> >> -Hoss >> http://www.lucidworks.com/ >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@solr.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@solr.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
