Yes - please close the vote on 3.1.7. We will just hold off publishing
artifacts to central and announcing until the 3.2.5 release is done. Thanks!

On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Ted Wilmes <[email protected]> wrote:

> 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
> > >> >> >> > > > > > > >
> > >> >> >> > > > > > >
> > >> >> >> > > > > >
> > >> >> >> > > > >
> > >> >> >> > > >
> > >> >> >> > >
> > >> >> >> >
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >>
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to