Oh, didn't know about that honestly. I guess I never completely read the Release Process docs.
Then I'll try to remember next time to review the docs already during code freeze. A link checker would be really great to have, Robert. Am 20.03.2019 um 20:55 schrieb Robert Dale: > Maybe we can make it more explicit that the snapshots have been deployed > and should be reviewed? I looked back at a couple of DISCUSS release > threads and there isn't really that type of announcement. It's more like, > 'hey, we should do a release and start a code freeze'. Then some time > later the next thread is the release review and the rest of us are like, > 'oh, we need to go review something now'. Unless you think doing 2 > pre-release reviews is too much? It is optional and doesn't require votes > so it shouldn't be too much burden for anyone but some of us could get a > head start. > > In any case, I've started to look at a link checker to put in the build > process. > > Robert Dale > > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 3:39 PM Stephen Mallette <spmalle...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>> I think this comes down to having a version of the docs available for >> review before we start the VOTE >> >> we already do this as part of code freeze week. i publish a final SNAPSHOT >> for review during the week. i was a little later than usual this time, but >> the docs are always out there ahead of time. it's a documented part of the >> "Pre-flight Check" process: >> >> http://tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/current/dev/developer/#_pre_flight_check >> >> See step 4. >> >> >> >> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 3:02 PM Florian Hockmann <f...@florian-hockmann.de> >> wrote: >> >>>> we need to figure out how we catch this stuff during code freeze and >> not >>>> during VOTE. if anyone has ideas how we do a better job during code >>> freeze >>>> week to >>> I think this comes down to having a version of the docs available for >>> review before we start the VOTE. We could now of course publish a >>> preview of the docs during code freeze, but I think the best solution >>> would be if we could automate the doc generation and publishment and >>> always have a preview of the docs available, e.g., via an URL like: >>> http://tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/master/reference/ >>> >>> Then we could easily review the docs way before we start the VOTE thread >>> and users could also use these docs (to get added explanations / >>> corrections). >>> Other popular projects follow a similar approach, like: >>> >>> Elasticsearch: >>> >> https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/master/index.html >>> Traefik: https://docs.traefik.io/master/ >>> PostgreSQL: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/index.html >>> >>> Any way, that's just a suggestion and it might be overkill for this >>> concrete problem. I especially can't really assess how much work would >>> be required for this, given that we're using Hadoop to generate the docs. >>> >>> Am 20.03.2019 um 18:29 schrieb Stephen Mallette: >>>> i don't know that i want to republish just for the links. Anyone have >>>> strong opinions on that? I would like to fix the missing code block >> for >>>> sure though and that's an easy one and doesn't require me to redo >>>> "everything". >>>> >>>> we need to figure out how we catch this stuff during code freeze and >> not >>>> during VOTE. if anyone has ideas how we do a better job during code >>> freeze >>>> week to >>>> >>>> 1. find busted links >>>> 2. find code that didn't generate right >>>> 3. find poorly formatted headings/toc >>>> >>>> please share your solutions..... >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 1:22 PM Robert Dale <robd...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Stephen, do you plan on regenerating the docs with the link fixes for >>> the >>>>> website when it's time to publish? >>>>> >>>>> Robert Dale >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 1:18 PM Robert Dale <robd...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>>>>> Daniel, how did you notice it missing? I didn't see the typical grey >>>>>> block. >>>>>> >>>>>> Robert Dale >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 11:01 AM Florian Hockmann < >>>>> f...@florian-hockmann.de> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Skimmed over the docs and didn't find any problems (apart from the >>>>>>> already mentioned missing SPARQL section). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> VOTE +1 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >>>>>>> Von: Stephen Mallette <spmalle...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 19. März 2019 21:31 >>>>>>> An: dev@tinkerpop.apache.org >>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [VOTE] TinkerPop 3.4.1 Release >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I skimmed through the user docs. They look good, however, the final >>>>>>>> code snippet at the bottom of >>>>>>>> >>> http://tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/3.4.1/reference/#sparql-with-gremlin >>>>>>>> is missing (not too big of a deal IMO though). >>>>>>> hmm - i guess i can patch that in the docs post release, but why did >>>>> that >>>>>>> happen.................... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 4:28 PM Daniel Kuppitz <m...@gremlin.guru> >>> wrote: >>>>>>>> *$ bin/validate-distribution.sh 3.4.1* >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Validating binary distributions >>>>>>>> * downloading Apache TinkerPop Gremlin >>>>>>>> (apache-tinkerpop-gremlin-console-3.4.1-bin.zip)... >>>>>>>> OK >>>>>>>> * validating signatures and checksums ... >>>>>>>> * PGP signature ... OK >>>>>>>> * SHA512 checksum ... OK >>>>>>>> * unzipping Apache TinkerPop Gremlin ... OK >>>>>>>> * validating Apache TinkerPop Gremlin's docs ... OK >>>>>>>> * validating Apache TinkerPop Gremlin's binaries ... OK >>>>>>>> * validating Apache TinkerPop Gremlin's legal files ... >>>>>>>> * LICENSE ... OK >>>>>>>> * NOTICE ... OK >>>>>>>> * validating Apache TinkerPop Gremlin's plugin directory ... OK >>>>>>>> * validating Apache TinkerPop Gremlin's lib directory ... OK >>>>>>>> * testing script evaluation ... OK >>>>>>>> * downloading Apache TinkerPop Gremlin >>>>>>>> (apache-tinkerpop-gremlin-server-3.4.1-bin.zip)... >>>>>>>> OK >>>>>>>> * validating signatures and checksums ... >>>>>>>> * PGP signature ... OK >>>>>>>> * SHA512 checksum ... OK >>>>>>>> * unzipping Apache TinkerPop Gremlin ... OK >>>>>>>> * validating Apache TinkerPop Gremlin's docs ... OK >>>>>>>> * validating Apache TinkerPop Gremlin's binaries ... OK >>>>>>>> * validating Apache TinkerPop Gremlin's legal files ... >>>>>>>> * LICENSE ... OK >>>>>>>> * NOTICE ... OK >>>>>>>> * validating Apache TinkerPop Gremlin's plugin directory ... OK >>>>>>>> * validating Apache TinkerPop Gremlin's lib directory ... OK >>>>>>>> Validating source distribution >>>>>>>> * downloading Apache TinkerPop 3.4.1 >>>>>>>> (apache-tinkerpop-3.4.1-src.zip)... OK >>>>>>>> * validating signatures and checksums ... >>>>>>>> * PGP signature ... OK >>>>>>>> * SHA512 checksum ... OK >>>>>>>> * unzipping Apache TinkerPop 3.4.1 ... OK >>>>>>>> * checking source files ... OK >>>>>>>> * building project ... OK >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I skimmed through the user docs. They look good, however, the final >>>>>>>> code snippet at the bottom of >>>>>>>> >>> http://tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/3.4.1/reference/#sparql-with-gremlin >>>>>>>> is missing (not too big of a deal IMO though). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> VOTE +1 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>> Daniel >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 11:59 AM Stephen Mallette >>>>>>>> <spmalle...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hello, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> We are happy to announce that TinkerPop 3.4.1 is ready for >> release. >>>>>>>>> The release artifacts can be found at this location: >>>>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tinkerpop/3.4.1/ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The source distribution is provided by: >>>>>>>>> apache-tinkerpop-3.4.1-src.zip >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Two binary distributions are provided for user convenience: >>>>>>>>> apache-tinkerpop-gremlin-console-3.4.1-bin.zip >>>>>>>>> apache-tinkerpop-gremlin-server-3.4.1-bin.zip >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The GPG key used to sign the release artifacts is available at: >>>>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tinkerpop/KEYS >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The online docs can be found here: >>>>>>>>> http://tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/3.4.1/ (user docs) >>>>>>>>> http://tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/3.4.1/upgrade/ (upgrade >>>>>>> docs) >>>>>>>>> http://tinkerpop.apache.org/javadocs/3.4.1/core/ (core >>>>>>> javadoc) >>>>>>>>> http://tinkerpop.apache.org/javadocs/3.4.1/full/ (full >>>>>>> javadoc) >>>>>>>>> http://tinkerpop.apache.org/dotnetdocs/3.4.1/ (.NET API >>>>> docs) >>>>>>>>> http://tinkerpop.apache.org/jsdocs/3.4.1/ (Javascript API >>>>>>>>> docs) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The tag in Apache Git can be found here: >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/tree/3.4.1 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The release notes are available here: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/blob/3.4.1/CHANGELOG.asciidoc >>>>>>>>> The [VOTE] will be open for the next 72 hours --- closing Friday >>>>>>>>> (March >>>>>>>> 22, >>>>>>>>> 2019) at 3pm EST. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> My vote is +1. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> NOTE: I had to push a commit to master after the tag for >>>>>>>>> validate-distribution.sh. please pull that change if you need to >> run >>>>>>>>> that script for purpose of review/testing. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thank you very much, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Stephen >>>>>>>>> >>>
