[RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.11.1 RC2
Hello, Igniters! Thanks to everyone. The vote is closed. The emergency Apache Ignite 2.11.1 release (RC2) has been accepted. I will continue on with the release. 5 - "+1" votes received and no "0", "-1" votes. Here are the votes received: - Ilya Kasnacheev (binding) - Pavel Tupitsyn (binding) - Ivan Daschinsky - Nikolay Izhikov (binding) - Vyacheslav Koptilin - Alex Plehanov (binding) - Valentin Kulichenko (binding) Here is the link to the voting thread: https://lists.apache.org/thread/2pwc0fv0pczhnxbyfkdhl1m3yvh8vrpb Thank you!
Re: Apache Ignite 2.12 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]
Folks, What do you think about fixing vulnerability log4j dependencies in rest-http, zookeeper modules in 2.12? The issue is in progress and can be resolved in a few days. [1] I suggest including it to the scope. [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13464 пт, 17 дек. 2021 г. в 16:22, Вячеслав Коптилин : > > Hi Nikita, > > The proposed timeline looks great. Thank you! > > Slava. > > пт, 17 дек. 2021 г. в 15:32, Nikita Amelchev : > > > Hello, Slava. > > > > I am planning the following timeline: > > > > Voting Date: December 20, 2021 > > Release Date: December 27, 2021 > > > > чт, 16 дек. 2021 г. в 11:52, Вячеслав Коптилин : > > > > > > Hello Nikita, > > > > > > > I have cherry-picked the issue [1] to the 2.12. It updates the log4j > > > version to 2.16. > > > Thanks a lot! > > > > > > Could you please share a current timeline for the rest steps related to > > the > > > release? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > S. > > > > > > ср, 15 дек. 2021 г. в 21:45, Nikita Amelchev : > > > > > > > I have cherry-picked the issue [1] to the 2.12. It updates the log4j > > > > version to 2.16. > > > > > > > > Slava, thank you. > > > > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-16127 > > > > > > > > ср, 15 дек. 2021 г. в 14:14, Вячеслав Коптилин < > > slava.kopti...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > Nikita, it seems that we have to add the following ticket > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-16127 to Apache Ignite > > 2.12 > > > > > release. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > S. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > вт, 14 дек. 2021 г. в 09:54, Nikita Amelchev : > > > > > > > > > > > +1 to move these auth issues to the next release. I will prepare > > RC at > > > > > > the nearest time. > > > > > > > > > > > > пн, 13 дек. 2021 г. в 16:13, Pavel Tupitsyn > >: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Agree with Nikolay, let's proceed with the release. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 3:31 PM Nikolay Izhikov < > > nizhi...@apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nikita. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don’t think IGNITE-16068 is a release blocker. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. It only happens when authentication enabled. > > > > > > > > 2. There is at lease 2 workarounds: > > > > > > > > a. Use the same file.encoding for all Ignite nodes. > > > > > > > > b. Use only latin characters in user login. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I propose to postpone this ticket and move on with the release. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 13 дек. 2021 г., в 15:28, Nikita Amelchev < > > namelc...@apache.org> > > > > > > > > написал(а): > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have cherry-picked the blocked [1] to the 2.12. It updates > > the > > > > > > log4j > > > > > > > > > version to 2.15. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The release is blocked by one blocker issue with auth. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-16101 > > > > > > > > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-16068 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > чт, 9 дек. 2021 г. в 12:44, Nikita Amelchev < > > > > namelc...@apache.org>: > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> Hello, Nikolay. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> I have cherry-picked the issue fix. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> Thank you. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> ср, 8 дек. 2021 г. в 18:47, Nikolay Izhikov < > > > > nizhi...@apache.org>: > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> Hello. > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> Let’s include [1] in 2.12 scope. > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> After migrations authentication processor to security API > > we > > > > have > > > > > > an > > > > > > > > issue. > > > > > > > > >>> Persistent data region should exists on client node if > > > > > > authentication > > > > > > > > is enabled. > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> It seems very annoying for the users. > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15969 > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > 2 дек. 2021 г., в 19:50, Nikita Amelchev < > > > > namelc...@apache.org> > > > > > > > > написал(а): > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to formally announce code freeze for 2.12.0. > > Only > > > > > > > > blockers are accepted to be included to the scope. [1] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We have one blocker issue [2] that will be fixed soon. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process#ReleaseProcess-P3.Stabilization > > > > > > > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15966 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > чт, 2 дек. 2021 г. в 16:01, Nikita Amelchev < > > > > namelc...@apache.org > > > > > > >: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, Igniters. > > > > > > > > >>
Re: Apache Ignite 2.12 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]
As for me, I am +1 for removing ZookeeperIpFinder from ignite-zookeeper. вт, 21 дек. 2021 г. в 13:26, Nikita Amelchev : > Folks, > > What do you think about fixing vulnerability log4j dependencies in > rest-http, zookeeper modules in 2.12? > > The issue is in progress and can be resolved in a few days. [1] > > I suggest including it to the scope. > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13464 > > пт, 17 дек. 2021 г. в 16:22, Вячеслав Коптилин : > > > > Hi Nikita, > > > > The proposed timeline looks great. Thank you! > > > > Slava. > > > > пт, 17 дек. 2021 г. в 15:32, Nikita Amelchev : > > > > > Hello, Slava. > > > > > > I am planning the following timeline: > > > > > > Voting Date: December 20, 2021 > > > Release Date: December 27, 2021 > > > > > > чт, 16 дек. 2021 г. в 11:52, Вячеслав Коптилин < > slava.kopti...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > > Hello Nikita, > > > > > > > > > I have cherry-picked the issue [1] to the 2.12. It updates the > log4j > > > > version to 2.16. > > > > Thanks a lot! > > > > > > > > Could you please share a current timeline for the rest steps related > to > > > the > > > > release? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > S. > > > > > > > > ср, 15 дек. 2021 г. в 21:45, Nikita Amelchev : > > > > > > > > > I have cherry-picked the issue [1] to the 2.12. It updates the > log4j > > > > > version to 2.16. > > > > > > > > > > Slava, thank you. > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-16127 > > > > > > > > > > ср, 15 дек. 2021 г. в 14:14, Вячеслав Коптилин < > > > slava.kopti...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > > > Nikita, it seems that we have to add the following ticket > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-16127 to Apache > Ignite > > > 2.12 > > > > > > release. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > S. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > вт, 14 дек. 2021 г. в 09:54, Nikita Amelchev < > namelc...@apache.org>: > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 to move these auth issues to the next release. I will > prepare > > > RC at > > > > > > > the nearest time. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > пн, 13 дек. 2021 г. в 16:13, Pavel Tupitsyn < > ptupit...@apache.org > > > >: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Agree with Nikolay, let's proceed with the release. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 3:31 PM Nikolay Izhikov < > > > nizhi...@apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nikita. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don’t think IGNITE-16068 is a release blocker. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. It only happens when authentication enabled. > > > > > > > > > 2. There is at lease 2 workarounds: > > > > > > > > > a. Use the same file.encoding for all Ignite nodes. > > > > > > > > > b. Use only latin characters in user login. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I propose to postpone this ticket and move on with the > release. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 13 дек. 2021 г., в 15:28, Nikita Amelchev < > > > namelc...@apache.org> > > > > > > > > > написал(а): > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have cherry-picked the blocked [1] to the 2.12. It > updates > > > the > > > > > > > log4j > > > > > > > > > > version to 2.15. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The release is blocked by one blocker issue with auth. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-16101 > > > > > > > > > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-16068 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > чт, 9 дек. 2021 г. в 12:44, Nikita Amelchev < > > > > > namelc...@apache.org>: > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Hello, Nikolay. > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I have cherry-picked the issue fix. > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Thank you. > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> ср, 8 дек. 2021 г. в 18:47, Nikolay Izhikov < > > > > > nizhi...@apache.org>: > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> Hello. > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> Let’s include [1] in 2.12 scope. > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> After migrations authentication processor to security > API > > > we > > > > > have > > > > > > > an > > > > > > > > > issue. > > > > > > > > > >>> Persistent data region should exists on client node if > > > > > > > authentication > > > > > > > > > is enabled. > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> It seems very annoying for the users. > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15969 > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > 2 дек. 2021 г., в 19:50, Nikita Amelchev < > > > > > namelc...@apache.org> > > > > > > > > > написал(а): > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to formally announce code freeze for > 2.12.0. > > > Only > > > > > > > > > blockers are accepted to be included to the scope. [1] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We have one bl
Re: Apache Ignite 2.12 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]
Also, zookeeper ip finder depends on good old log4j 1.x вт, 21 дек. 2021 г. в 13:32, Ivan Daschinsky : > As for me, I am +1 for removing ZookeeperIpFinder from ignite-zookeeper. > > > вт, 21 дек. 2021 г. в 13:26, Nikita Amelchev : > >> Folks, >> >> What do you think about fixing vulnerability log4j dependencies in >> rest-http, zookeeper modules in 2.12? >> >> The issue is in progress and can be resolved in a few days. [1] >> >> I suggest including it to the scope. >> >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13464 >> >> пт, 17 дек. 2021 г. в 16:22, Вячеслав Коптилин > >: >> > >> > Hi Nikita, >> > >> > The proposed timeline looks great. Thank you! >> > >> > Slava. >> > >> > пт, 17 дек. 2021 г. в 15:32, Nikita Amelchev : >> > >> > > Hello, Slava. >> > > >> > > I am planning the following timeline: >> > > >> > > Voting Date: December 20, 2021 >> > > Release Date: December 27, 2021 >> > > >> > > чт, 16 дек. 2021 г. в 11:52, Вячеслав Коптилин < >> slava.kopti...@gmail.com>: >> > > > >> > > > Hello Nikita, >> > > > >> > > > > I have cherry-picked the issue [1] to the 2.12. It updates the >> log4j >> > > > version to 2.16. >> > > > Thanks a lot! >> > > > >> > > > Could you please share a current timeline for the rest steps >> related to >> > > the >> > > > release? >> > > > >> > > > Thanks, >> > > > S. >> > > > >> > > > ср, 15 дек. 2021 г. в 21:45, Nikita Amelchev > >: >> > > > >> > > > > I have cherry-picked the issue [1] to the 2.12. It updates the >> log4j >> > > > > version to 2.16. >> > > > > >> > > > > Slava, thank you. >> > > > > >> > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-16127 >> > > > > >> > > > > ср, 15 дек. 2021 г. в 14:14, Вячеслав Коптилин < >> > > slava.kopti...@gmail.com>: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Hello, >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Nikita, it seems that we have to add the following ticket >> > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-16127 to Apache >> Ignite >> > > 2.12 >> > > > > > release. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Thanks, >> > > > > > S. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > вт, 14 дек. 2021 г. в 09:54, Nikita Amelchev < >> namelc...@apache.org>: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > +1 to move these auth issues to the next release. I will >> prepare >> > > RC at >> > > > > > > the nearest time. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > пн, 13 дек. 2021 г. в 16:13, Pavel Tupitsyn < >> ptupit...@apache.org >> > > >: >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Agree with Nikolay, let's proceed with the release. >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 3:31 PM Nikolay Izhikov < >> > > nizhi...@apache.org >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Nikita. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > I don’t think IGNITE-16068 is a release blocker. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > 1. It only happens when authentication enabled. >> > > > > > > > > 2. There is at lease 2 workarounds: >> > > > > > > > > a. Use the same file.encoding for all Ignite >> nodes. >> > > > > > > > > b. Use only latin characters in user login. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > I propose to postpone this ticket and move on with the >> release. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > 13 дек. 2021 г., в 15:28, Nikita Amelchev < >> > > namelc...@apache.org> >> > > > > > > > > написал(а): >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Hello. >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > I have cherry-picked the blocked [1] to the 2.12. It >> updates >> > > the >> > > > > > > log4j >> > > > > > > > > > version to 2.15. >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > The release is blocked by one blocker issue with auth. >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-16101 >> > > > > > > > > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-16068 >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > чт, 9 дек. 2021 г. в 12:44, Nikita Amelchev < >> > > > > namelc...@apache.org>: >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Hello, Nikolay. >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> I have cherry-picked the issue fix. >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Thank you. >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> ср, 8 дек. 2021 г. в 18:47, Nikolay Izhikov < >> > > > > nizhi...@apache.org>: >> > > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >>> Hello. >> > > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >>> Let’s include [1] in 2.12 scope. >> > > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >>> After migrations authentication processor to security >> API >> > > we >> > > > > have >> > > > > > > an >> > > > > > > > > issue. >> > > > > > > > > >>> Persistent data region should exists on client node if >> > > > > > > authentication >> > > > > > > > > is enabled. >> > > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >>> It seems very annoying for the users. >> > > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >>> [1] >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15969 >> > > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > > 2 дек. 2021 г., в 19:50, Nikita Amelchev < >> > > > > namelc...@apache.org> >> > > > >
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.11.1 RC2
Hi Maxim, Just a reminder that since the release of the new website, we need to update the download.pug [1] file in case of a release and then generate the HTML version following this updated instruction. If you have any questions, please reach out to Erlan (CC-ed). [1] https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/_src/download.pug [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Website+Development On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 4:36 AM Maxim Muzafarov wrote: > Hello, Igniters! > > > Thanks to everyone. The vote is closed. > The emergency Apache Ignite 2.11.1 release (RC2) has been accepted. > I will continue on with the release. > > 5 - "+1" votes received and no "0", "-1" votes. > > > Here are the votes received: > > - Ilya Kasnacheev (binding) > - Pavel Tupitsyn (binding) > - Ivan Daschinsky > - Nikolay Izhikov (binding) > - Vyacheslav Koptilin > - Alex Plehanov (binding) > - Valentin Kulichenko (binding) > > > Here is the link to the voting thread: > https://lists.apache.org/thread/2pwc0fv0pczhnxbyfkdhl1m3yvh8vrpb > > Thank you! >
A new feedback has been added : 46
A new feedback has been added, go to bugyard.io to see all the details... https://bugyard.io A new feedback has been added "Thanks you for contacting us " by sabelopaulos816 View feedback https://app.bugyard.io/web/app/rycqZJDyY/f/61c14f1639632e001464046a
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.11.1 RC2
Denis, Thanks for the update. I've just recently found that all releases on the download page [1] have the same release date. Is it correct? [1] https://ignite.apache.org/download.cgi On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 14:47, Denis Magda wrote: > > Hi Maxim, > > Just a reminder that since the release of the new website, we need to update > the download.pug [1] file in case of a release and then generate the HTML > version following this updated instruction. If you have any questions, please > reach out to Erlan (CC-ed). > > [1] https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/_src/download.pug > [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Website+Development > > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 4:36 AM Maxim Muzafarov wrote: >> >> Hello, Igniters! >> >> >> Thanks to everyone. The vote is closed. >> The emergency Apache Ignite 2.11.1 release (RC2) has been accepted. >> I will continue on with the release. >> >> 5 - "+1" votes received and no "0", "-1" votes. >> >> >> Here are the votes received: >> >> - Ilya Kasnacheev (binding) >> - Pavel Tupitsyn (binding) >> - Ivan Daschinsky >> - Nikolay Izhikov (binding) >> - Vyacheslav Koptilin >> - Alex Plehanov (binding) >> - Valentin Kulichenko (binding) >> >> >> Here is the link to the voting thread: >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/2pwc0fv0pczhnxbyfkdhl1m3yvh8vrpb >> >> Thank you!
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.11.1 RC2
Ops, yes, seems that we messed up with the releases dates. It originates from the PUG files like this one: https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/_src/_components/download-binary.pug Would you be able to correct the dates? We can find the dates in a previous version of download.html: https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/d45ad6211cd34e9a9c94726a6e61babe9c1d5fb8/download.html Lastly, would you please change version 2.11 to 2.11.1 for the button from the header? https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/_src/_components/header.pug -- Denis On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 7:06 AM Maxim Muzafarov wrote: > Denis, > > Thanks for the update. > I've just recently found that all releases on the download page [1] > have the same release date. Is it correct? > > [1] https://ignite.apache.org/download.cgi > > On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 14:47, Denis Magda wrote: > > > > Hi Maxim, > > > > Just a reminder that since the release of the new website, we need to > update the download.pug [1] file in case of a release and then generate the > HTML version following this updated instruction. If you have any questions, > please reach out to Erlan (CC-ed). > > > > [1] > https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/_src/download.pug > > [2] > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Website+Development > > > > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 4:36 AM Maxim Muzafarov > wrote: > >> > >> Hello, Igniters! > >> > >> > >> Thanks to everyone. The vote is closed. > >> The emergency Apache Ignite 2.11.1 release (RC2) has been accepted. > >> I will continue on with the release. > >> > >> 5 - "+1" votes received and no "0", "-1" votes. > >> > >> > >> Here are the votes received: > >> > >> - Ilya Kasnacheev (binding) > >> - Pavel Tupitsyn (binding) > >> - Ivan Daschinsky > >> - Nikolay Izhikov (binding) > >> - Vyacheslav Koptilin > >> - Alex Plehanov (binding) > >> - Valentin Kulichenko (binding) > >> > >> > >> Here is the link to the voting thread: > >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/2pwc0fv0pczhnxbyfkdhl1m3yvh8vrpb > >> > >> Thank you! >
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.11.1 RC2
Folks, Building the website becomes more and more complicated :-) Can we update the documentation [1] with more details for the folks who are not familiar with node.js? Actually, I'm stuck on the error below with compiling the project. However, it seems to me that node.js require ES modules that are being missed by my installation. Can anyone assist with this? mario@mario:~/IdeaProjects/ignite-website$ gulp /home/mmuzaf/IdeaProjects/ignite-website/gulpfile.js:1 import browserSync from 'browser-sync'; ^^^ SyntaxError: Unexpected identifier at Module._compile (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:723:23) at Object.Module._extensions..js (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:789:10) at Module.load (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:653:32) at tryModuleLoad (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:593:12) at Function.Module._load (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:585:3) at Module.require (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:692:17) at require (internal/modules/cjs/helpers.js:25:18) at requireOrImport (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/gulp-cli/lib/shared/require-or-import.js:19:11) at execute (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/gulp-cli/lib/versioned/^4.0.0/index.js:37:3) at Liftoff.handleArguments (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/gulp-cli/index.js:211:24) [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Website+Development#WebsiteDevelopment-SettingUp On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 15:40, Denis Magda wrote: > > Ops, yes, seems that we messed up with the releases dates. It originates from > the PUG files like this one: > https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/_src/_components/download-binary.pug > > Would you be able to correct the dates? We can find the dates in a previous > version of download.html: > https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/d45ad6211cd34e9a9c94726a6e61babe9c1d5fb8/download.html > > Lastly, would you please change version 2.11 to 2.11.1 for the button from > the header? > https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/_src/_components/header.pug > > -- > Denis > > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 7:06 AM Maxim Muzafarov wrote: >> >> Denis, >> >> Thanks for the update. >> I've just recently found that all releases on the download page [1] >> have the same release date. Is it correct? >> >> [1] https://ignite.apache.org/download.cgi >> >> On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 14:47, Denis Magda wrote: >> > >> > Hi Maxim, >> > >> > Just a reminder that since the release of the new website, we need to >> > update the download.pug [1] file in case of a release and then generate >> > the HTML version following this updated instruction. If you have any >> > questions, please reach out to Erlan (CC-ed). >> > >> > [1] https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/_src/download.pug >> > [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Website+Development >> > >> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 4:36 AM Maxim Muzafarov wrote: >> >> >> >> Hello, Igniters! >> >> >> >> >> >> Thanks to everyone. The vote is closed. >> >> The emergency Apache Ignite 2.11.1 release (RC2) has been accepted. >> >> I will continue on with the release. >> >> >> >> 5 - "+1" votes received and no "0", "-1" votes. >> >> >> >> >> >> Here are the votes received: >> >> >> >> - Ilya Kasnacheev (binding) >> >> - Pavel Tupitsyn (binding) >> >> - Ivan Daschinsky >> >> - Nikolay Izhikov (binding) >> >> - Vyacheslav Koptilin >> >> - Alex Plehanov (binding) >> >> - Valentin Kulichenko (binding) >> >> >> >> >> >> Here is the link to the voting thread: >> >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/2pwc0fv0pczhnxbyfkdhl1m3yvh8vrpb >> >> >> >> Thank you!
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.11.1 RC2
Hi Maxim, What version of node js version did you use? On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 6:47 PM Maxim Muzafarov wrote: > Folks, > > > Building the website becomes more and more complicated :-) > Can we update the documentation [1] with more details for the folks > who are not familiar with node.js? > > Actually, I'm stuck on the error below with compiling the project. > However, it seems to me that node.js require ES modules that are being > missed by my installation. Can anyone assist with this? > > > mario@mario:~/IdeaProjects/ignite-website$ gulp > /home/mmuzaf/IdeaProjects/ignite-website/gulpfile.js:1 > import browserSync from 'browser-sync'; >^^^ > > SyntaxError: Unexpected identifier > at Module._compile (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:723:23) > at Object.Module._extensions..js > (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:789:10) > at Module.load (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:653:32) > at tryModuleLoad (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:593:12) > at Function.Module._load (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:585:3) > at Module.require (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:692:17) > at require (internal/modules/cjs/helpers.js:25:18) > at requireOrImport > > (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/gulp-cli/lib/shared/require-or-import.js:19:11) > at execute > (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/gulp-cli/lib/versioned/^4.0.0/index.js:37:3) > at Liftoff.handleArguments > (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/gulp-cli/index.js:211:24) > > > > [1] > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Website+Development#WebsiteDevelopment-SettingUp > > On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 15:40, Denis Magda wrote: > > > > Ops, yes, seems that we messed up with the releases dates. It originates > from the PUG files like this one: > > > https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/_src/_components/download-binary.pug > > > > Would you be able to correct the dates? We can find the dates in a > previous version of download.html: > > > https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/d45ad6211cd34e9a9c94726a6e61babe9c1d5fb8/download.html > > > > Lastly, would you please change version 2.11 to 2.11.1 for the button > from the header? > > > https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/_src/_components/header.pug > > > > -- > > Denis > > > > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 7:06 AM Maxim Muzafarov > wrote: > >> > >> Denis, > >> > >> Thanks for the update. > >> I've just recently found that all releases on the download page [1] > >> have the same release date. Is it correct? > >> > >> [1] https://ignite.apache.org/download.cgi > >> > >> On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 14:47, Denis Magda wrote: > >> > > >> > Hi Maxim, > >> > > >> > Just a reminder that since the release of the new website, we need to > update the download.pug [1] file in case of a release and then generate the > HTML version following this updated instruction. If you have any questions, > please reach out to Erlan (CC-ed). > >> > > >> > [1] > https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/_src/download.pug > >> > [2] > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Website+Development > >> > > >> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 4:36 AM Maxim Muzafarov > wrote: > >> >> > >> >> Hello, Igniters! > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Thanks to everyone. The vote is closed. > >> >> The emergency Apache Ignite 2.11.1 release (RC2) has been accepted. > >> >> I will continue on with the release. > >> >> > >> >> 5 - "+1" votes received and no "0", "-1" votes. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Here are the votes received: > >> >> > >> >> - Ilya Kasnacheev (binding) > >> >> - Pavel Tupitsyn (binding) > >> >> - Ivan Daschinsky > >> >> - Nikolay Izhikov (binding) > >> >> - Vyacheslav Koptilin > >> >> - Alex Plehanov (binding) > >> >> - Valentin Kulichenko (binding) > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Here is the link to the voting thread: > >> >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/2pwc0fv0pczhnxbyfkdhl1m3yvh8vrpb > >> >> > >> >> Thank you! >
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.11.1 RC2
Erlan, thanks for stepping in. Could you please update the instruction once Maxim succeeds with all the steps on his end? It's important that community members such as Maxim know exactly how to work with the new website. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Website+Development#WebsiteDevelopment-SettingUp On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 8:01 AM Erlan Aytpaev wrote: > Hi Maxim, > > What version of node js version did you use? > > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 6:47 PM Maxim Muzafarov wrote: > >> Folks, >> >> >> Building the website becomes more and more complicated :-) >> Can we update the documentation [1] with more details for the folks >> who are not familiar with node.js? >> >> Actually, I'm stuck on the error below with compiling the project. >> However, it seems to me that node.js require ES modules that are being >> missed by my installation. Can anyone assist with this? >> >> >> mario@mario:~/IdeaProjects/ignite-website$ gulp >> /home/mmuzaf/IdeaProjects/ignite-website/gulpfile.js:1 >> import browserSync from 'browser-sync'; >>^^^ >> >> SyntaxError: Unexpected identifier >> at Module._compile (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:723:23) >> at Object.Module._extensions..js >> (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:789:10) >> at Module.load (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:653:32) >> at tryModuleLoad (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:593:12) >> at Function.Module._load (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:585:3) >> at Module.require (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:692:17) >> at require (internal/modules/cjs/helpers.js:25:18) >> at requireOrImport >> >> (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/gulp-cli/lib/shared/require-or-import.js:19:11) >> at execute >> (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/gulp-cli/lib/versioned/^4.0.0/index.js:37:3) >> at Liftoff.handleArguments >> (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/gulp-cli/index.js:211:24) >> >> >> >> [1] >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Website+Development#WebsiteDevelopment-SettingUp >> >> On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 15:40, Denis Magda wrote: >> > >> > Ops, yes, seems that we messed up with the releases dates. It >> originates from the PUG files like this one: >> > >> https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/_src/_components/download-binary.pug >> > >> > Would you be able to correct the dates? We can find the dates in a >> previous version of download.html: >> > >> https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/d45ad6211cd34e9a9c94726a6e61babe9c1d5fb8/download.html >> > >> > Lastly, would you please change version 2.11 to 2.11.1 for the button >> from the header? >> > >> https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/_src/_components/header.pug >> > >> > -- >> > Denis >> > >> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 7:06 AM Maxim Muzafarov >> wrote: >> >> >> >> Denis, >> >> >> >> Thanks for the update. >> >> I've just recently found that all releases on the download page [1] >> >> have the same release date. Is it correct? >> >> >> >> [1] https://ignite.apache.org/download.cgi >> >> >> >> On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 14:47, Denis Magda wrote: >> >> > >> >> > Hi Maxim, >> >> > >> >> > Just a reminder that since the release of the new website, we need >> to update the download.pug [1] file in case of a release and then generate >> the HTML version following this updated instruction. If you have any >> questions, please reach out to Erlan (CC-ed). >> >> > >> >> > [1] >> https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/_src/download.pug >> >> > [2] >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Website+Development >> >> > >> >> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 4:36 AM Maxim Muzafarov >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> Hello, Igniters! >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Thanks to everyone. The vote is closed. >> >> >> The emergency Apache Ignite 2.11.1 release (RC2) has been accepted. >> >> >> I will continue on with the release. >> >> >> >> >> >> 5 - "+1" votes received and no "0", "-1" votes. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Here are the votes received: >> >> >> >> >> >> - Ilya Kasnacheev (binding) >> >> >> - Pavel Tupitsyn (binding) >> >> >> - Ivan Daschinsky >> >> >> - Nikolay Izhikov (binding) >> >> >> - Vyacheslav Koptilin >> >> >> - Alex Plehanov (binding) >> >> >> - Valentin Kulichenko (binding) >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Here is the link to the voting thread: >> >> >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/2pwc0fv0pczhnxbyfkdhl1m3yvh8vrpb >> >> >> >> >> >> Thank you! >> >
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.11.1 RC2
Folks, Thank you for helping me. Sorry for the 'spam' from my side :-) I've reinstalled Node.js. The following version was installed 'Node.js v17.x' using this guide [1]. Now the error is the following: mario@mario:~/IdeaProjects/ignite-website$ gulp SyntaxError: Unexpected token ':' at ESMLoader.moduleStrategy (node:internal/modules/esm/translators:115:18) at ESMLoader.moduleProvider (node:internal/modules/esm/loader:289:14) at async link (node:internal/modules/esm/module_job:70:21) [1] https://github.com/nodesource/distributions/blob/master/README.md#installation-instructions On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 16:04, Denis Magda wrote: > > Erlan, thanks for stepping in. Could you please update the instruction once > Maxim succeeds with all the steps on his end? It's important that community > members such as Maxim know exactly how to work with the new website. > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Website+Development#WebsiteDevelopment-SettingUp > > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 8:01 AM Erlan Aytpaev wrote: > > > Hi Maxim, > > > > What version of node js version did you use? > > > > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 6:47 PM Maxim Muzafarov wrote: > > > >> Folks, > >> > >> > >> Building the website becomes more and more complicated :-) > >> Can we update the documentation [1] with more details for the folks > >> who are not familiar with node.js? > >> > >> Actually, I'm stuck on the error below with compiling the project. > >> However, it seems to me that node.js require ES modules that are being > >> missed by my installation. Can anyone assist with this? > >> > >> > >> mario@mario:~/IdeaProjects/ignite-website$ gulp > >> /home/mmuzaf/IdeaProjects/ignite-website/gulpfile.js:1 > >> import browserSync from 'browser-sync'; > >>^^^ > >> > >> SyntaxError: Unexpected identifier > >> at Module._compile (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:723:23) > >> at Object.Module._extensions..js > >> (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:789:10) > >> at Module.load (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:653:32) > >> at tryModuleLoad (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:593:12) > >> at Function.Module._load (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:585:3) > >> at Module.require (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:692:17) > >> at require (internal/modules/cjs/helpers.js:25:18) > >> at requireOrImport > >> > >> (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/gulp-cli/lib/shared/require-or-import.js:19:11) > >> at execute > >> (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/gulp-cli/lib/versioned/^4.0.0/index.js:37:3) > >> at Liftoff.handleArguments > >> (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/gulp-cli/index.js:211:24) > >> > >> > >> > >> [1] > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Website+Development#WebsiteDevelopment-SettingUp > >> > >> On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 15:40, Denis Magda wrote: > >> > > >> > Ops, yes, seems that we messed up with the releases dates. It > >> originates from the PUG files like this one: > >> > > >> https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/_src/_components/download-binary.pug > >> > > >> > Would you be able to correct the dates? We can find the dates in a > >> previous version of download.html: > >> > > >> https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/d45ad6211cd34e9a9c94726a6e61babe9c1d5fb8/download.html > >> > > >> > Lastly, would you please change version 2.11 to 2.11.1 for the button > >> from the header? > >> > > >> https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/_src/_components/header.pug > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Denis > >> > > >> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 7:06 AM Maxim Muzafarov > >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> Denis, > >> >> > >> >> Thanks for the update. > >> >> I've just recently found that all releases on the download page [1] > >> >> have the same release date. Is it correct? > >> >> > >> >> [1] https://ignite.apache.org/download.cgi > >> >> > >> >> On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 14:47, Denis Magda wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> > Hi Maxim, > >> >> > > >> >> > Just a reminder that since the release of the new website, we need > >> to update the download.pug [1] file in case of a release and then generate > >> the HTML version following this updated instruction. If you have any > >> questions, please reach out to Erlan (CC-ed). > >> >> > > >> >> > [1] > >> https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/_src/download.pug > >> >> > [2] > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Website+Development > >> >> > > >> >> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 4:36 AM Maxim Muzafarov > >> wrote: > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Hello, Igniters! > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Thanks to everyone. The vote is closed. > >> >> >> The emergency Apache Ignite 2.11.1 release (RC2) has been accepted. > >> >> >> I will continue on with the release. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> 5 - "+1" votes received and no "0", "-1" votes. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Here are the votes received: > >> >> >> > >> >> >> - Ilya Kasnacheev (binding) > >> >> >> - Pavel Tupitsyn (binding) > >> >> >> - Ivan Daschinsky > >> >> >> - Nikolay Iz
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.11.1 RC2
May be just add instruction how to build site using docker? As for ignite documentation? вт, 21 дек. 2021 г. в 16:10, Maxim Muzafarov : > Folks, > > Thank you for helping me. Sorry for the 'spam' from my side :-) > > > I've reinstalled Node.js. The following version was installed 'Node.js > v17.x' using this guide [1]. > Now the error is the following: > > mario@mario:~/IdeaProjects/ignite-website$ gulp > SyntaxError: Unexpected token ':' > at ESMLoader.moduleStrategy > (node:internal/modules/esm/translators:115:18) > at ESMLoader.moduleProvider (node:internal/modules/esm/loader:289:14) > at async link (node:internal/modules/esm/module_job:70:21) > > > [1] > https://github.com/nodesource/distributions/blob/master/README.md#installation-instructions > > On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 16:04, Denis Magda wrote: > > > > Erlan, thanks for stepping in. Could you please update the instruction > once > > Maxim succeeds with all the steps on his end? It's important that > community > > members such as Maxim know exactly how to work with the new website. > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Website+Development#WebsiteDevelopment-SettingUp > > > > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 8:01 AM Erlan Aytpaev wrote: > > > > > Hi Maxim, > > > > > > What version of node js version did you use? > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 6:47 PM Maxim Muzafarov > wrote: > > > > > >> Folks, > > >> > > >> > > >> Building the website becomes more and more complicated :-) > > >> Can we update the documentation [1] with more details for the folks > > >> who are not familiar with node.js? > > >> > > >> Actually, I'm stuck on the error below with compiling the project. > > >> However, it seems to me that node.js require ES modules that are being > > >> missed by my installation. Can anyone assist with this? > > >> > > >> > > >> mario@mario:~/IdeaProjects/ignite-website$ gulp > > >> /home/mmuzaf/IdeaProjects/ignite-website/gulpfile.js:1 > > >> import browserSync from 'browser-sync'; > > >>^^^ > > >> > > >> SyntaxError: Unexpected identifier > > >> at Module._compile (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:723:23) > > >> at Object.Module._extensions..js > > >> (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:789:10) > > >> at Module.load (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:653:32) > > >> at tryModuleLoad (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:593:12) > > >> at Function.Module._load (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:585:3) > > >> at Module.require (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:692:17) > > >> at require (internal/modules/cjs/helpers.js:25:18) > > >> at requireOrImport > > >> > > >> > (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/gulp-cli/lib/shared/require-or-import.js:19:11) > > >> at execute > > >> > (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/gulp-cli/lib/versioned/^4.0.0/index.js:37:3) > > >> at Liftoff.handleArguments > > >> (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/gulp-cli/index.js:211:24) > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> [1] > > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Website+Development#WebsiteDevelopment-SettingUp > > >> > > >> On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 15:40, Denis Magda wrote: > > >> > > > >> > Ops, yes, seems that we messed up with the releases dates. It > > >> originates from the PUG files like this one: > > >> > > > >> > https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/_src/_components/download-binary.pug > > >> > > > >> > Would you be able to correct the dates? We can find the dates in a > > >> previous version of download.html: > > >> > > > >> > https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/d45ad6211cd34e9a9c94726a6e61babe9c1d5fb8/download.html > > >> > > > >> > Lastly, would you please change version 2.11 to 2.11.1 for the > button > > >> from the header? > > >> > > > >> > https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/_src/_components/header.pug > > >> > > > >> > -- > > >> > Denis > > >> > > > >> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 7:06 AM Maxim Muzafarov > > >> wrote: > > >> >> > > >> >> Denis, > > >> >> > > >> >> Thanks for the update. > > >> >> I've just recently found that all releases on the download page [1] > > >> >> have the same release date. Is it correct? > > >> >> > > >> >> [1] https://ignite.apache.org/download.cgi > > >> >> > > >> >> On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 14:47, Denis Magda > wrote: > > >> >> > > > >> >> > Hi Maxim, > > >> >> > > > >> >> > Just a reminder that since the release of the new website, we > need > > >> to update the download.pug [1] file in case of a release and then > generate > > >> the HTML version following this updated instruction. If you have any > > >> questions, please reach out to Erlan (CC-ed). > > >> >> > > > >> >> > [1] > > >> > https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/_src/download.pug > > >> >> > [2] > > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Website+Development > > >> >> > > > >> >> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 4:36 AM Maxim Muzafarov < > mmu...@apache.org> > > >> wrote: > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> Hello, Igniters! > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> Tha
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.11.1 RC2
Erlan, > Lastly, would you please change version 2.11 to 2.11.1 for the button from > the header? > https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/_src/_components/header.pug Can we also use the 'latest' file [1] version to pick up it instead of manual updating the page 'header.pug' each time? Should we file an issue for that? [1] https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/latest On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 16:32, Ivan Daschinsky wrote: > > May be just add instruction how to build site using docker? As for ignite > documentation? > > вт, 21 дек. 2021 г. в 16:10, Maxim Muzafarov : > > > Folks, > > > > Thank you for helping me. Sorry for the 'spam' from my side :-) > > > > > > I've reinstalled Node.js. The following version was installed 'Node.js > > v17.x' using this guide [1]. > > Now the error is the following: > > > > mario@mario:~/IdeaProjects/ignite-website$ gulp > > SyntaxError: Unexpected token ':' > > at ESMLoader.moduleStrategy > > (node:internal/modules/esm/translators:115:18) > > at ESMLoader.moduleProvider (node:internal/modules/esm/loader:289:14) > > at async link (node:internal/modules/esm/module_job:70:21) > > > > > > [1] > > https://github.com/nodesource/distributions/blob/master/README.md#installation-instructions > > > > On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 16:04, Denis Magda wrote: > > > > > > Erlan, thanks for stepping in. Could you please update the instruction > > once > > > Maxim succeeds with all the steps on his end? It's important that > > community > > > members such as Maxim know exactly how to work with the new website. > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Website+Development#WebsiteDevelopment-SettingUp > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 8:01 AM Erlan Aytpaev wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Maxim, > > > > > > > > What version of node js version did you use? > > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 6:47 PM Maxim Muzafarov > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> Folks, > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> Building the website becomes more and more complicated :-) > > > >> Can we update the documentation [1] with more details for the folks > > > >> who are not familiar with node.js? > > > >> > > > >> Actually, I'm stuck on the error below with compiling the project. > > > >> However, it seems to me that node.js require ES modules that are being > > > >> missed by my installation. Can anyone assist with this? > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> mario@mario:~/IdeaProjects/ignite-website$ gulp > > > >> /home/mmuzaf/IdeaProjects/ignite-website/gulpfile.js:1 > > > >> import browserSync from 'browser-sync'; > > > >>^^^ > > > >> > > > >> SyntaxError: Unexpected identifier > > > >> at Module._compile (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:723:23) > > > >> at Object.Module._extensions..js > > > >> (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:789:10) > > > >> at Module.load (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:653:32) > > > >> at tryModuleLoad (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:593:12) > > > >> at Function.Module._load (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:585:3) > > > >> at Module.require (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:692:17) > > > >> at require (internal/modules/cjs/helpers.js:25:18) > > > >> at requireOrImport > > > >> > > > >> > > (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/gulp-cli/lib/shared/require-or-import.js:19:11) > > > >> at execute > > > >> > > (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/gulp-cli/lib/versioned/^4.0.0/index.js:37:3) > > > >> at Liftoff.handleArguments > > > >> (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/gulp-cli/index.js:211:24) > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> [1] > > > >> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Website+Development#WebsiteDevelopment-SettingUp > > > >> > > > >> On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 15:40, Denis Magda wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > Ops, yes, seems that we messed up with the releases dates. It > > > >> originates from the PUG files like this one: > > > >> > > > > >> > > https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/_src/_components/download-binary.pug > > > >> > > > > >> > Would you be able to correct the dates? We can find the dates in a > > > >> previous version of download.html: > > > >> > > > > >> > > https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/d45ad6211cd34e9a9c94726a6e61babe9c1d5fb8/download.html > > > >> > > > > >> > Lastly, would you please change version 2.11 to 2.11.1 for the > > button > > > >> from the header? > > > >> > > > > >> > > https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/_src/_components/header.pug > > > >> > > > > >> > -- > > > >> > Denis > > > >> > > > > >> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 7:06 AM Maxim Muzafarov > > > >> wrote: > > > >> >> > > > >> >> Denis, > > > >> >> > > > >> >> Thanks for the update. > > > >> >> I've just recently found that all releases on the download page [1] > > > >> >> have the same release date. Is it correct? > > > >> >> > > > >> >> [1] https://ignite.apache.org/download.cgi > > > >> >> > > > >> >> On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 14:47, Denis Magda > > wrote: > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > Hi Max
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.11.1 RC2
Yes, please create an issue. I will think about updating the instructions and using the latest file. On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 7:56 PM Maxim Muzafarov wrote: > Erlan, > > > Lastly, would you please change version 2.11 to 2.11.1 for the button > from the header? > > > https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/_src/_components/header.pug > > Can we also use the 'latest' file [1] version to pick up it instead of > manual updating the page 'header.pug' each time? Should we file an > issue for that? > > [1] https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/latest > > On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 16:32, Ivan Daschinsky wrote: > > > > May be just add instruction how to build site using docker? As for ignite > > documentation? > > > > вт, 21 дек. 2021 г. в 16:10, Maxim Muzafarov : > > > > > Folks, > > > > > > Thank you for helping me. Sorry for the 'spam' from my side :-) > > > > > > > > > I've reinstalled Node.js. The following version was installed 'Node.js > > > v17.x' using this guide [1]. > > > Now the error is the following: > > > > > > mario@mario:~/IdeaProjects/ignite-website$ gulp > > > SyntaxError: Unexpected token ':' > > > at ESMLoader.moduleStrategy > > > (node:internal/modules/esm/translators:115:18) > > > at ESMLoader.moduleProvider > (node:internal/modules/esm/loader:289:14) > > > at async link (node:internal/modules/esm/module_job:70:21) > > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > https://github.com/nodesource/distributions/blob/master/README.md#installation-instructions > > > > > > On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 16:04, Denis Magda wrote: > > > > > > > > Erlan, thanks for stepping in. Could you please update the > instruction > > > once > > > > Maxim succeeds with all the steps on his end? It's important that > > > community > > > > members such as Maxim know exactly how to work with the new website. > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Website+Development#WebsiteDevelopment-SettingUp > > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 8:01 AM Erlan Aytpaev > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Maxim, > > > > > > > > > > What version of node js version did you use? > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 6:47 PM Maxim Muzafarov > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Folks, > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> Building the website becomes more and more complicated :-) > > > > >> Can we update the documentation [1] with more details for the > folks > > > > >> who are not familiar with node.js? > > > > >> > > > > >> Actually, I'm stuck on the error below with compiling the project. > > > > >> However, it seems to me that node.js require ES modules that are > being > > > > >> missed by my installation. Can anyone assist with this? > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> mario@mario:~/IdeaProjects/ignite-website$ gulp > > > > >> /home/mmuzaf/IdeaProjects/ignite-website/gulpfile.js:1 > > > > >> import browserSync from 'browser-sync'; > > > > >>^^^ > > > > >> > > > > >> SyntaxError: Unexpected identifier > > > > >> at Module._compile (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:723:23) > > > > >> at Object.Module._extensions..js > > > > >> (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:789:10) > > > > >> at Module.load (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:653:32) > > > > >> at tryModuleLoad (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:593:12) > > > > >> at Function.Module._load > (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:585:3) > > > > >> at Module.require (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:692:17) > > > > >> at require (internal/modules/cjs/helpers.js:25:18) > > > > >> at requireOrImport > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/gulp-cli/lib/shared/require-or-import.js:19:11) > > > > >> at execute > > > > >> > > > > (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/gulp-cli/lib/versioned/^4.0.0/index.js:37:3) > > > > >> at Liftoff.handleArguments > > > > >> (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/gulp-cli/index.js:211:24) > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> [1] > > > > >> > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Website+Development#WebsiteDevelopment-SettingUp > > > > >> > > > > >> On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 15:40, Denis Magda > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Ops, yes, seems that we messed up with the releases dates. It > > > > >> originates from the PUG files like this one: > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/_src/_components/download-binary.pug > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Would you be able to correct the dates? We can find the dates > in a > > > > >> previous version of download.html: > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/d45ad6211cd34e9a9c94726a6e61babe9c1d5fb8/download.html > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Lastly, would you please change version 2.11 to 2.11.1 for the > > > button > > > > >> from the header? > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/blob/master/_src/_components/header.pug > > > > >> > > > > > >> > -- > > > > >> > Denis > > > > >> > > > > > >> > On Tue, Dec 21, 202
Re: [DISCUSSION] @Nullable/@NotNull annotation usage in Ignite 3
Ivan, I agree with you. Basically, what I'm suggesting is to accept non-nullable as default, but if a parameter must be nullable for whatever reason, mark it with the @Nullable annotation. Regarding "a user can put anything there without much thinking": I understand what you mean, but I believe the annotation is not the problem. It's nullability itself that causes the ambiguity - null value is always a special case that means different things for different values. @Nullable at least sends a signal that nulls need to be considered. If a user doesn't want to think anyway, there is not much we can do :) (Except trying to make the variable non-nullable, of course) -Val On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 11:40 PM Ivan Pavlukhin wrote: > Val, > > > Therefore, it's crucial to bring the attention of the API's user to such > parameters. (@Nullable) > > This sounds wrong for me. If a method parameter is marked as > @Nullable, then a user can put anything there without much thinking. > Opposite happens with @NotNull parameters, with them a user should > think whether his variable can be null or not. > > As for me using nullable variables should be avoided as much as > possible, but not all developers share this point of view. And > especially in Ignite codebase it was quite common to use nullable > variables, for the first time it was very unusual for me. > > 2021-12-20 22:06 GMT+03:00, Valentin Kulichenko < > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com>: > > Neither solution is completely bulletproof, and I don't think that's what > > we are looking for. We need something that provides a reasonable value, > but > > also does not clutter the code with too many annotations. > > > > I would also keep in mind that annotations are used not only for static > > analysis, but by developers as well. And from this standpoint, I feel > > that @Nullable is much more important, because 'null' is a special value > > which is treated differently in different circumstances. Therefore, it's > > crucial to bring the attention of the API's user to such parameters. On > the > > other hand, non-nullable parameters are inherently safer, so there is > less > > need to annotate them. > > > > -Val > > > > On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 7:42 AM Alexander Polovtcev > > > > wrote: > > > >> Hi, Ivan. > >> > >> > it seems not bulletproof > >> > >> I completely agree with you. As I wrote in the original message, this > >> becomes even worse in case of 3-rd party dependencies, because they may > >> not > >> be annotated, which can lead to confusions. But looks like this is not a > >> big deal, because these annotations are not intended to cover 100% of > >> cases > >> and should not be treated as a guarantee against NPEs. Maybe covering > >> *some* cases is enough. > >> > >> > Perhaps we can insist on not using nulls as much as possible. > >> > >> Same here, I agree with you and it correlates with clear API design in > >> general. However, sometimes nullable parameters and return values are > >> justified, so how can we formalize that? > >> > >> On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 10:52 AM Ivan Pavlukhin > >> wrote: > >> > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > While option #2 looks very appealing it seems not bulletproof > >> > reliable, someone can occasionally miss @Nullable annotation. Option > >> > #3 seems more practical too me, as missed @NotNull annotations cannot > >> > do much harm. > >> > > >> > Also I am thinking about using nullable parameters in general. Perhaps > >> > we can insist on not using nulls as much as possible. With such > >> > requirement in guidelines option #2 becomes practical. > >> > > >> > 2021-12-17 14:47 GMT+03:00, Alexander Polovtcev > >> > >> >: > >> > > Maksim, thank you for the suggestion. > >> > > > >> > > I've never used NullAway, but after having a quick look I think it > >> might > >> > be > >> > > an overkill, since it is a plugin for the ErrorProne, which is a > >> separate > >> > > tool. I recall some efforts of introducing ErrorProne to Ignite 3 > and > >> > they > >> > > were not successful. But again, I don't have much experience in that > >> > > regard. I wonder if IDEA inspections would be enough, since they are > >> easy > >> > > to use during development and AFAIK are already run during the TC > >> builds. > >> > > > >> > > Regarding Ignite 2, I don't know if it would be viable to add these > >> > > annotations to the existing code (in order to have meaningful > >> > > checks), > >> > > since the codebase is so large. But nevertheless we can try to adopt > >> the > >> > > same approach there as well. > >> > > > >> > > On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 12:10 PM Maksim Timonin < > >> timoninma...@apache.org > >> > > > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > >> > >> Hi! > >> > >> > >> > >> There is a pretty popular project NullAway [1] that checks code of > a > >> > >> project in compile-time for possible NPE. AFAIK, it works only with > >> the > >> > >> "@Nullable" annotation. I think we can try to add this check to > >> Ignite2 > >> > >> and > >> > >> 3. > >> > >> > >> > >
[ANNOUNCE] Apache Ignite 2.11.1 Released
The Apache Ignite Community is pleased to announce the release of Apache Ignite 2.11.1. Apache Ignite® is a Distributed Database For High-Performance Computing With In-Memory Speed. https://ignite.apache.org This is an emergency release that fixes the log4j2 dependencies. Please check the details and the risk mitigation information here: https://blogs.apache.org/ignite/entry/apache-ignite-2-11-1 The full list of changes you can find in the RELEASE_NOTES: https://ignite.apache.org/releases/2.11.1/release_notes.html Download the latest Ignite version from here: https://ignite.apache.org/download.cgi Please let us know if you encounter any problems: https://ignite.apache.org/community/resources.html#ask Regards, Maxim Muzafarov on behalf of the Apache Ignite community.
Re: [DISCUSSION] @Nullable/@NotNull annotation usage in Ignite 3
Val, > Basically, what I'm suggesting is to accept non-nullable as default Sounds good for me. Then it should be clearly stated in code guidelines and regular static analysis for this should be organized from the beginning. 2021-12-21 20:35 GMT+03:00, Valentin Kulichenko : > Ivan, > > I agree with you. Basically, what I'm suggesting is to accept non-nullable > as default, but if a parameter must be nullable for whatever reason, mark > it with the @Nullable annotation. > > Regarding "a user can put anything there without much thinking": I > understand what you mean, but I believe the annotation is not the problem. > It's nullability itself that causes the ambiguity - null value is always a > special case that means different things for different values. @Nullable at > least sends a signal that nulls need to be considered. If a user doesn't > want to think anyway, there is not much we can do :) (Except trying to make > the variable non-nullable, of course) > > -Val > > On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 11:40 PM Ivan Pavlukhin > wrote: > >> Val, >> >> > Therefore, it's crucial to bring the attention of the API's user to >> > such >> parameters. (@Nullable) >> >> This sounds wrong for me. If a method parameter is marked as >> @Nullable, then a user can put anything there without much thinking. >> Opposite happens with @NotNull parameters, with them a user should >> think whether his variable can be null or not. >> >> As for me using nullable variables should be avoided as much as >> possible, but not all developers share this point of view. And >> especially in Ignite codebase it was quite common to use nullable >> variables, for the first time it was very unusual for me. >> >> 2021-12-20 22:06 GMT+03:00, Valentin Kulichenko < >> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com>: >> > Neither solution is completely bulletproof, and I don't think that's >> > what >> > we are looking for. We need something that provides a reasonable value, >> but >> > also does not clutter the code with too many annotations. >> > >> > I would also keep in mind that annotations are used not only for static >> > analysis, but by developers as well. And from this standpoint, I feel >> > that @Nullable is much more important, because 'null' is a special >> > value >> > which is treated differently in different circumstances. Therefore, >> > it's >> > crucial to bring the attention of the API's user to such parameters. On >> the >> > other hand, non-nullable parameters are inherently safer, so there is >> less >> > need to annotate them. >> > >> > -Val >> > >> > On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 7:42 AM Alexander Polovtcev >> > >> > wrote: >> > >> >> Hi, Ivan. >> >> >> >> > it seems not bulletproof >> >> >> >> I completely agree with you. As I wrote in the original message, this >> >> becomes even worse in case of 3-rd party dependencies, because they >> >> may >> >> not >> >> be annotated, which can lead to confusions. But looks like this is not >> >> a >> >> big deal, because these annotations are not intended to cover 100% of >> >> cases >> >> and should not be treated as a guarantee against NPEs. Maybe covering >> >> *some* cases is enough. >> >> >> >> > Perhaps we can insist on not using nulls as much as possible. >> >> >> >> Same here, I agree with you and it correlates with clear API design in >> >> general. However, sometimes nullable parameters and return values are >> >> justified, so how can we formalize that? >> >> >> >> On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 10:52 AM Ivan Pavlukhin >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> > Hi, >> >> > >> >> > While option #2 looks very appealing it seems not bulletproof >> >> > reliable, someone can occasionally miss @Nullable annotation. Option >> >> > #3 seems more practical too me, as missed @NotNull annotations >> >> > cannot >> >> > do much harm. >> >> > >> >> > Also I am thinking about using nullable parameters in general. >> >> > Perhaps >> >> > we can insist on not using nulls as much as possible. With such >> >> > requirement in guidelines option #2 becomes practical. >> >> > >> >> > 2021-12-17 14:47 GMT+03:00, Alexander Polovtcev >> >> > > >> >: >> >> > > Maksim, thank you for the suggestion. >> >> > > >> >> > > I've never used NullAway, but after having a quick look I think it >> >> might >> >> > be >> >> > > an overkill, since it is a plugin for the ErrorProne, which is a >> >> separate >> >> > > tool. I recall some efforts of introducing ErrorProne to Ignite 3 >> and >> >> > they >> >> > > were not successful. But again, I don't have much experience in >> >> > > that >> >> > > regard. I wonder if IDEA inspections would be enough, since they >> >> > > are >> >> easy >> >> > > to use during development and AFAIK are already run during the TC >> >> builds. >> >> > > >> >> > > Regarding Ignite 2, I don't know if it would be viable to add >> >> > > these >> >> > > annotations to the existing code (in order to have meaningful >> >> > > checks), >> >> > > since the codebase is so large. But nevertheless we can try to >> >> > > adopt >> >> the
