Good deal, should I close out the vote for 3.1.7 tonight, barring any -1's and then we can hold off on the announcement to coincide with 3.2.5?
--Ted On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 12:28 PM, Stephen Mallette <[email protected]> wrote: > Kuppitz (who has the day off today) just informed me that the fix he was > responsible for is in. I'm going to restart the release process - Hopefully > i'll have a new VOTE thread opened up by end of day. > > On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 9:34 AM, Stephen Mallette <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > It seems that way. It could only be a problem if someone submitted gryo > > bytecode generated from something other than our GraphTraversal > > implementation. That seems unlikely so I guess this was a lesser problem > > than I thought - oh well. > > > > On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 9:15 AM, Robert Dale <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> So I guess inside, outside, and between are never actually serialized > >> directly because they become a composition of other predicates? > >> > >> Robert Dale > >> > >> On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 8:48 AM, Robert Dale <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > Was working on serializing JanusGraph predicates - geo, text - for > >> > withRemote. Since those predicates become P, I had to borrow and > modify > >> the > >> > TinkerPop P serializer and noticed that something's not like the > other. > >> > > >> > Robert Dale > >> > > >> > On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 8:37 AM, Stephen Mallette < > [email protected] > >> > > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> >> Robert, how did you go about hitting that problem with P.inside()? It > >> >> occurs to me now that this was so deadly a bug because I'm not sure > we > >> >> ever > >> >> end up actually serializing an "inside". > >> >> > >> >> On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 6:23 AM, Stephen Mallette < > >> [email protected]> > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > We do have a test for P.inside in the process tests but I didn't > >> realize > >> >> > that it doesn't compile to a P.inside at bytecode serialization > time: > >> >> > > >> >> > gremlin> g.V(1).outE().has("weight", P.inside(0.0d, > >> >> 0.6d)).inV().explain() > >> >> > ==>Traversal Explanation > >> >> > ============================================================ > >> >> > ============================================================ > >> >> > =========================== > >> >> > Original Traversal [GraphStep(vertex,[1]), > >> >> > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > >> >> > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > >> >> > > >> >> > ConnectiveStrategy [D] [GraphStep(vertex,[1]), > >> >> > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > >> >> > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > >> >> > MatchPredicateStrategy [O] [GraphStep(vertex,[1]), > >> >> > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > >> >> > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > >> >> > FilterRankingStrategy [O] [GraphStep(vertex,[1]), > >> >> > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > >> >> > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > >> >> > InlineFilterStrategy [O] [GraphStep(vertex,[1]), > >> >> > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > >> >> > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > >> >> > IncidentToAdjacentStrategy [O] [GraphStep(vertex,[1]), > >> >> > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > >> >> > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > >> >> > AdjacentToIncidentStrategy [O] [GraphStep(vertex,[1]), > >> >> > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > >> >> > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > >> >> > RepeatUnrollStrategy [O] [GraphStep(vertex,[1]), > >> >> > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > >> >> > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > >> >> > RangeByIsCountStrategy [O] [GraphStep(vertex,[1]), > >> >> > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > >> >> > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > >> >> > PathRetractionStrategy [O] [GraphStep(vertex,[1]), > >> >> > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > >> >> > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > >> >> > LazyBarrierStrategy [O] [GraphStep(vertex,[1]), > >> >> > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > >> >> > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > >> >> > TinkerGraphCountStrategy [P] [GraphStep(vertex,[1]), > >> >> > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > >> >> > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > >> >> > TinkerGraphStepStrategy [P] [TinkerGraphStep(vertex,[1]), > >> >> > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > >> >> > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > >> >> > ProfileStrategy [F] [TinkerGraphStep(vertex,[1]), > >> >> > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > >> >> > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > >> >> > StandardVerificationStrategy [V] [TinkerGraphStep(vertex,[1]), > >> >> > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > >> >> > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > >> >> > > >> >> > Final Traversal [TinkerGraphStep(vertex,[1]), > >> >> > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > >> >> > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > >> >> > > >> >> > We likely need more direct serialization tests of P, but I think > >> those > >> >> > already exist in master. Made a note to review further after > release. > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 3:57 PM, Robert Dale <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> >> Fix pushed to tp32 and master. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Robert Dale > >> >> >> > >> >> >> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Stephen Mallette < > >> >> [email protected]> > >> >> >> wrote: > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Well - now that the VOTE on 3.2.5 is cancelled we can now fix up > >> >> these > >> >> >> > couple of issues, specifically: > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > 1. anyStepRecursively() bug (kuppitz is going to handle that) > >> >> >> > 2. Gryo serialization of inside() (robert dale, you had the fix > >> for > >> >> >> that - > >> >> >> > do you want to just CTR that in? though i'm also interested in > why > >> >> tests > >> >> >> > didn't catch that problem) > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > I'm going to leave out the other issue noted: > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1691 > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > as it is not user facing - just something related to the test > >> suite > >> >> >> > (providers at least have a workaround for that if they hit > >> problems > >> >> as > >> >> >> they > >> >> >> > can @OptOut). > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > I also don't intend to deploy another SNAPSHOT so i'm just going > >> to > >> >> >> keep us > >> >> >> > on "3.2.5" and not revert to "3.2.5-SNAPSHOT". Let's just patch > >> this > >> >> up > >> >> >> > then I'll start on a fresh release packaging tomorrow. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Any other concerns? > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 6:27 AM, Robert Dale <[email protected]> > >> >> wrote: > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > That will probably work too. I use > >> https://wummel.github.io/linkc > >> >> >> hecker/ > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > Robert Dale > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 6:20 AM, Daniel Kuppitz > <[email protected] > >> > > >> >> >> wrote: > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > https://validator.w3.org/checklink > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 12:18 PM, Stephen Mallette < > >> >> >> > [email protected]> > >> >> >> > > > wrote: > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > > huh - that's a neat idea. is there a specific tool you > use? > >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 5:48 AM, Robert Dale < > >> [email protected] > >> >> > > >> >> >> > wrote: > >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > Linkchecker passes. > >> >> >> > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > Robert Dale > >> >> >> > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 6:38 AM, Stephen Mallette < > >> >> >> > > [email protected] > >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > wrote: > >> >> >> > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > > I published latest docs for 3.2.5-SNAPSHOT: > >> >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > > http://tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/3.2.5-SNAPSHOT/ > >> >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > > and made another deployment to the Apache Snapshot > Repo > >> >> after > >> >> >> > those > >> >> >> > > > > > > TinkerFactory adjustments. > >> >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 8:39 PM, Stephen Mallette < > >> >> >> > > > [email protected] > >> >> >> > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > > wrote: > >> >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > Just a reminder that code is frozen on the tp32 > branch > >> >> >> starting > >> >> >> > > > > > tomorrow > >> >> >> > > > > > > > (Saturday) and for the following week. We'll use > this > >> >> >> thread to > >> >> >> > > > > discuss > >> >> >> > > > > > > any > >> >> >> > > > > > > > issues or problems on 3.2.5 that are found during > >> >> testing. > >> >> >> > There > >> >> >> > > > are > >> >> >> > > > > no > >> >> >> > > > > > > > open pull requests and no outstanding issues that > I'm > >> >> aware > >> >> >> of. > >> >> >> > > > I've > >> >> >> > > > > > > > published a TinkerPop 3.2.5-SNAPSHOT for providers > to > >> >> test > >> >> >> > > against > >> >> >> > > > > (or > >> >> >> > > > > > > they > >> >> >> > > > > > > > may build themselves - whatever is more convenient). > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > Thanks, > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > Stephen > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > >
