Hi Stephen, I can take a crack at the 3.2.8 release. --Ted
On Thu, Mar 22, 2018, 3:43 PM Stephen Mallette <spmalle...@gmail.com> wrote: > So, TINKERPOP-1865 merged and TINKERPOP-1866 is in PR form awaiting review: > > https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/pull/823 > > Insanely great work from Florian Hockmann killing all these .NET tickets on > the way up to release prior to his holiday time - appreciated! > > I think we also want to get in Jorge's PR so that we can release properly > signed .NET assemblies: > > https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/pull/822 > > Other than, that I think we are setup for code freeze tomorrow and we can > start focusing on more testing/docs. > > Does anyone care to volunteer to take 3.2.8 off my hands? Otherwise, I will > manage both releases myself. > > > > On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 12:00 PM, Stephen Mallette <spmalle...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Just a quick note to mention that we're down to just these two issues in > > JIRA: > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1866 > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1865 (has a PR at > > https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/pull/820) > > > > any others? > > > > Looks like we might get this all closed up by code freeze on Friday > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 12:11 PM, Stephen Mallette <spmalle...@gmail.com > > > > wrote: > > > >> I just made an update on two issues that I thought needed to be done > with > >> gremlin-python for release, specifically: > >> > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1898 > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1895 > >> > >> if you're following along, i basically closed 1895 as a duplicate of > 1898 > >> as the two issues are related - ultimately, the issues is with > specifying > >> strategies when a lambda is present. basically, i can't get the test i > had > >> validating a fix to pass consistently and I believe that the reason is > >> related to something that is out of our hands - an issue in jython > >> processing varargs. Anyway, i don't imagine 1898 will get closed in time > >> for release, but personally, I don't think this is a massive issue to > block > >> us from moving forward. I also think we have a reasonable workaround as > >> gremlin-python users should be able to submit their lambdas as groovy > and > >> get a successful traversal execution. > >> > >> > >> > >> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 9:42 AM, Florian Hockmann < > f...@florian-hockmann.de> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> I already started working on TINKERPOP-1901, but some tests failed and > I > >>> wanted to use a Docker image of the Gremlin Server for easier debugging > >>> which is why I created a PR for that first. > >>> Finishing TINKERPOP-1854 should be really easy once TINKERPOP-1901 is > >>> done. > >>> > >>> Supporting g:T (TINKERPOP-1866) shouldn't require much work. It should > >>> just need a small deserializer. > >>> > >>> But I'm not sure about the test related tickets (TINKERPOP-1865 and > >>> TINKERPOP-1892). I looked into the failing tests when the new scenarios > >>> were introduced and they seemed to be caused by bugs / missing > >>> functionality in the way we create traversals from the Gherkin features > >>> rather than real bugs in Gremlin.Net. > >>> > >>> I also still see the problem of releasing Gremlin.Net from a Unix > system > >>> as strong name signing is still not supported. The newest Visual Studio > >>> version that was released on Monday (15.6) includes the fix, but we > still > >>> have to wait for the next release of the dotnet CLI tool. I asked in > their > >>> Gitter channel about an estimate but didn't get an answer so far. We > might > >>> have to set up a small build job on AppVeyor to build and pack > Gremlin.Net > >>> so that the release manager can download the NuGet packages from there > and > >>> then only has to push them. I can't handle the NuGet packaging this > time as > >>> I'm on vacation in the second half of March and first week of April. > >>> > >>> Do we have to set the release date in stone now or could we just see > >>> where we are at the end of next week and then decide whether we stay > with > >>> the release date in the first week of April or whether we need more > time? > >>> > >>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > >>> Von: Jorge Bay Gondra <jorgebaygon...@gmail.com> > >>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 8. März 2018 09:26 > >>> An: dev@tinkerpop.apache.org > >>> Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] 3.2.8/3.3.2 Release Issues > >>> > >>> Lambdas in .NET is blocked by TINKERPOP-1901, I've updated JIRA to > >>> reflect that. > >>> > >>> I don't know if we can make it with the current scope in that timeline. > >>> I have very little / no time available for the .NET GLV issues until > the > >>> end of next week... > >>> > >>> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 9:35 PM, Stephen Mallette <spmalle...@gmail.com > > > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> > In a previous thread we had the idea that we would look to release > >>> > 3.2.8/3.3.2 around the first week of April which means that we will > >>> > likely code freeze in about 10 days to focus on review/test/docs. I > >>> > think that we want to see these issues polished up before we release: > >>> > > >>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1866 (Support g:T > for > >>> > .NET) > >>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1854 (Lambdas in > .NET > >>> > - already has a PR) > >>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1865 (Run .NET tests > >>> > on GraphSON 3.0) > >>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1892 (A few failing > >>> > tests in .NET) > >>> > > >>> > Jorge/Florian, hopefully you can help us get to the finish line on > >>> > those .NET issues? > >>> > > >>> > The following 3 are all python related around lambdas and i think > >>> > fixing one will fix all (i'm still digging into these): > >>> > > >>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1895 > >>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1896 > >>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1898 > >>> > > >>> > Obviously we would want to close out all current PRs that are open as > >>> well. > >>> > Committers, we could use some reviews please - there is a glut of > them > >>> > at this point. > >>> > > >>> > Interestingly there's no problems to solve with the Javascript > GLV...I > >>> > guess I shouldn't be paranoid :) > >>> > > >>> > Are there any concerns with trying to finish up the items I've > posted? > >>> > Anyone know of anything else that is crucial for this release? > >>> > > >>> > >>> > >> > > >
