1.2.0 uploaded (Re: 1.2.0 is tagged and frozen)
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004, Martin Cooper wrote: The release is built, but I have a couple of problems. 1) My ISP has gone flaky on me, and I haven't been able to upload it to minotaur. They claim the problems should be fixed tomorrow, so hopefully I'll be able to upload it then. The release is now, finally, on minotaur. You can find it here: http://www.apache.org/~martinc/struts/ Before I send out an announcement message, I would really appreciate it if someone could verify the integrity of the files (e.g. by checking the sigs against the files themselves), since I had so much trouble uploading them. random-spout As a result of this debacle, I have a new-found intense dislike of my ISP and a new-found respect for Linux. My ISP supports only Windows, and has been unable to resolve my problems in uploading large files using Windows, even though it is abundantly clear that the problem is on their end. Eventually, I solved the problem by transferring the files to a separate box that runs SuSE Linux (Thanks, Arron!), and uploading the files from there using scp. My ISP does not support Linux at all, yet scp on Linux recovered from the network stalls that caused Windows to lock up. So it seems that networking is more reliable, with my ISP, using unsupported operating systems than using supported operating systems... /random-spout -- Martin Cooper 2) Some of the exercise-taglibs tests are failing: 2a) bean:include fails because it is trying to include welcome.html, but there is no such file. 2b) html:img fails because there are no images in the struts-examples web app at all. 2c) html:messages fails with a lot of nulls in the test table. It looks like all of these are probably issues with the test app itself, rather than the tags, so I'm not overly concerned, and suspect we probably should go ahead with 1.2.0 anyway, especially since we're not claiming it's a final release. Once I get the build uploaded, I'll ask other folks to take it for a spin before sending out an announcement. Actually, with this new release strategy, where should the announcement message go, since it's not a Final release? The same lists, or a subset? Thoughts? -- Martin Cooper On Sun, 22 Feb 2004, Martin Cooper wrote: Please hold off on all checkins until the release is done. Thanks. -- Martin Cooper - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: 1.2.0 uploaded (Re: 1.2.0 is tagged and frozen)
The first thing I noticed is that struts-el is missing from the download. I used the one I had from a nightly build in December and it didn't seem to cause conflicts. I tried 1.2.0 in AppFuse and all tests pass! Nice work gents. I didn't even have to modify any files - my last Struts update was December 2, 2003. Matt -Original Message- From: Martin Cooper [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 1:39 AM To: Struts Developers List Subject: 1.2.0 uploaded (Re: 1.2.0 is tagged and frozen) On Sun, 22 Feb 2004, Martin Cooper wrote: The release is built, but I have a couple of problems. 1) My ISP has gone flaky on me, and I haven't been able to upload it to minotaur. They claim the problems should be fixed tomorrow, so hopefully I'll be able to upload it then. The release is now, finally, on minotaur. You can find it here: http://www.apache.org/~martinc/struts/ Before I send out an announcement message, I would really appreciate it if someone could verify the integrity of the files (e.g. by checking the sigs against the files themselves), since I had so much trouble uploading them. random-spout As a result of this debacle, I have a new-found intense dislike of my ISP and a new-found respect for Linux. My ISP supports only Windows, and has been unable to resolve my problems in uploading large files using Windows, even though it is abundantly clear that the problem is on their end. Eventually, I solved the problem by transferring the files to a separate box that runs SuSE Linux (Thanks, Arron!), and uploading the files from there using scp. My ISP does not support Linux at all, yet scp on Linux recovered from the network stalls that caused Windows to lock up. So it seems that networking is more reliable, with my ISP, using unsupported operating systems than using supported operating systems... /random-spout -- Martin Cooper 2) Some of the exercise-taglibs tests are failing: 2a) bean:include fails because it is trying to include welcome.html, but there is no such file. 2b) html:img fails because there are no images in the struts-examples web app at all. 2c) html:messages fails with a lot of nulls in the test table. It looks like all of these are probably issues with the test app itself, rather than the tags, so I'm not overly concerned, and suspect we probably should go ahead with 1.2.0 anyway, especially since we're not claiming it's a final release. Once I get the build uploaded, I'll ask other folks to take it for a spin before sending out an announcement. Actually, with this new release strategy, where should the announcement message go, since it's not a Final release? The same lists, or a subset? Thoughts? -- Martin Cooper On Sun, 22 Feb 2004, Martin Cooper wrote: Please hold off on all checkins until the release is done. Thanks. -- Martin Cooper - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: 1.2.0 uploaded (Re: 1.2.0 is tagged and frozen) - watch out for ActionErrors - ActionMessages in validation code
I notice that the most recent version of your splendid two-fields
validator (looking in CVS at
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/*checkout*/struts/appfuse/src/web/
org/appfuse/webapp/util/ValidationUtil.java) still has the ActionErrors
class in it's method signature:
boolean validateTwoFields(Object bean, ValidatorAction va, Field field,
ActionErrors errors, HttpServletRequest request)
However, you can get some nasty silent errors from struts if you do
this, as the 'errors' variable won't be populated (it'll be null, due to
struts now expecting it to be the ActionMessages class), and when the
null pointer exception occurs in your method (when you attempt to report
a validation error), it will cause some difficult-to-diagnose errors
higher up the stack.
For a bit more insight into the nullness of the 'errors' variable, look
at the initValidator() method in the Resources class:
http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/jakarta-struts/src/share/org/apache/st
ruts/validator/Resources.java
The ActionErrors-ActionMessages change occurred somewhere around rev
1.22 of that class.
The updated version of your validateTwoFields method looks like this:
public static boolean validateTwoFields(
Object bean,
ValidatorAction va,
Field field,
ActionMessages errors,
HttpServletRequest request) {
String value1 = ValidatorUtils.getValueAsString(bean,
field.getProperty());
String sProperty2 = field.getVarValue(secondProperty);
String value2 = ValidatorUtils.getValueAsString(bean,
sProperty2);
try {
boolean equal = GenericValidator.isBlankOrNull(value1) ?
GenericValidator.isBlankOrNull(value2) : value1.equals(value2);
if (!equal) {
errors.add(field.getKey(),
Resources.getActionMessage(request, va, field));
return false;
}
} catch (Exception e) {
errors.add(field.getKey(),
Resources.getActionMessage(request, va, field));
return false;
}
return true;
}
(I also corrected a small bug at line 44 of the old method where
value1=null, value2='some text' would validate ok!).
Best regards,
Roberto
-Original Message-
From: Matt Raible [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 25 February 2004 09:15
To: 'Struts Developers List'
Subject: RE: 1.2.0 uploaded (Re: 1.2.0 is tagged and frozen)
The first thing I noticed is that struts-el is missing from the
download. I used the one I had from a nightly build in December and it
didn't seem to cause conflicts.
I tried 1.2.0 in AppFuse and all tests pass! Nice work gents. I didn't
even have to modify any files - my last Struts update was December 2,
2003.
Matt
--- -
Visit our Internet site at http://www.reuters.com
Get closer to the financial markets with Reuters Messaging - for more
information and to register, visit http://www.reuters.com/messaging
Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be
the views of Reuters Ltd.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: 1.2.0 uploaded (Re: 1.2.0 is tagged and frozen)
On Wed, 25 Feb 2004, Matt Raible wrote: The first thing I noticed is that struts-el is missing from the download. I used the one I had from a nightly build in December and it didn't seem to cause conflicts. Fooey. I don't know why that would have happened. I'll take a look when I get home tonight. And thanks for catching it! -- Martin Cooper I tried 1.2.0 in AppFuse and all tests pass! Nice work gents. I didn't even have to modify any files - my last Struts update was December 2, 2003. Matt -Original Message- From: Martin Cooper [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 1:39 AM To: Struts Developers List Subject: 1.2.0 uploaded (Re: 1.2.0 is tagged and frozen) On Sun, 22 Feb 2004, Martin Cooper wrote: The release is built, but I have a couple of problems. 1) My ISP has gone flaky on me, and I haven't been able to upload it to minotaur. They claim the problems should be fixed tomorrow, so hopefully I'll be able to upload it then. The release is now, finally, on minotaur. You can find it here: http://www.apache.org/~martinc/struts/ Before I send out an announcement message, I would really appreciate it if someone could verify the integrity of the files (e.g. by checking the sigs against the files themselves), since I had so much trouble uploading them. random-spout As a result of this debacle, I have a new-found intense dislike of my ISP and a new-found respect for Linux. My ISP supports only Windows, and has been unable to resolve my problems in uploading large files using Windows, even though it is abundantly clear that the problem is on their end. Eventually, I solved the problem by transferring the files to a separate box that runs SuSE Linux (Thanks, Arron!), and uploading the files from there using scp. My ISP does not support Linux at all, yet scp on Linux recovered from the network stalls that caused Windows to lock up. So it seems that networking is more reliable, with my ISP, using unsupported operating systems than using supported operating systems... /random-spout -- Martin Cooper 2) Some of the exercise-taglibs tests are failing: 2a) bean:include fails because it is trying to include welcome.html, but there is no such file. 2b) html:img fails because there are no images in the struts-examples web app at all. 2c) html:messages fails with a lot of nulls in the test table. It looks like all of these are probably issues with the test app itself, rather than the tags, so I'm not overly concerned, and suspect we probably should go ahead with 1.2.0 anyway, especially since we're not claiming it's a final release. Once I get the build uploaded, I'll ask other folks to take it for a spin before sending out an announcement. Actually, with this new release strategy, where should the announcement message go, since it's not a Final release? The same lists, or a subset? Thoughts? -- Martin Cooper On Sun, 22 Feb 2004, Martin Cooper wrote: Please hold off on all checkins until the release is done. Thanks. -- Martin Cooper - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 1.2.0 uploaded (Re: 1.2.0 is tagged and frozen)
Good to hear... Now you can join the new age debate of not Windoze versus Linux but rather what flavor of Linux?! Haiku Hint: Gentoo rule supreme. Suse should be a girls name. Red Hat is for Fools. /me likes pointless debates -Tim Martin Cooper wrote: On Sun, 22 Feb 2004, Martin Cooper wrote: The release is built, but I have a couple of problems. 1) My ISP has gone flaky on me, and I haven't been able to upload it to minotaur. They claim the problems should be fixed tomorrow, so hopefully I'll be able to upload it then. The release is now, finally, on minotaur. You can find it here: http://www.apache.org/~martinc/struts/ Before I send out an announcement message, I would really appreciate it if someone could verify the integrity of the files (e.g. by checking the sigs against the files themselves), since I had so much trouble uploading them. random-spout As a result of this debacle, I have a new-found intense dislike of my ISP and a new-found respect for Linux. My ISP supports only Windows, and has been unable to resolve my problems in uploading large files using Windows, even though it is abundantly clear that the problem is on their end. Eventually, I solved the problem by transferring the files to a separate box that runs SuSE Linux (Thanks, Arron!), and uploading the files from there using scp. My ISP does not support Linux at all, yet scp on Linux recovered from the network stalls that caused Windows to lock up. So it seems that networking is more reliable, with my ISP, using unsupported operating systems than using supported operating systems... /random-spout -- Martin Cooper 2) Some of the exercise-taglibs tests are failing: 2a) bean:include fails because it is trying to include welcome.html, but there is no such file. 2b) html:img fails because there are no images in the struts-examples web app at all. 2c) html:messages fails with a lot of nulls in the test table. It looks like all of these are probably issues with the test app itself, rather than the tags, so I'm not overly concerned, and suspect we probably should go ahead with 1.2.0 anyway, especially since we're not claiming it's a final release. Once I get the build uploaded, I'll ask other folks to take it for a spin before sending out an announcement. Actually, with this new release strategy, where should the announcement message go, since it's not a Final release? The same lists, or a subset? Thoughts? -- Martin Cooper On Sun, 22 Feb 2004, Martin Cooper wrote: Please hold off on all checkins until the release is done. Thanks. -- Martin Cooper - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Struts Haiku ( RE: 1.2.0 uploaded (Re: 1.2.0 is tagged and frozen))
From: Tim Chen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Haiku Hint: Gentoo rule supreme. Suse should be a girls name. Red Hat is for Fools. http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?StrutsHaiku -Wendy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 1.2.0 is tagged and frozen
On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 11:23:08 -0800, Paul Sundling wrote: I should probably still remove author tags from the docs and consolidate those into the volunteers page also. I'm afraid that our volunteers page is subject to the same considerations as the author tags. :( * Low hanging suit. In the unlikely event of a law suit, this is a (very) convenient list of parties to join to the action. We may think it's silly, but it is what an attorney would do. Each of these people would then be responsible for having themselves severed from the suit. (Guilty until proven innocent, I'm afraid.) The ASF would do what they could, but resources are limited; we shouldn't tempt fate. * No strings attached. An important ASF principle is that all the code and documentation belong to the Foundation and its Community. Tags and other credits tend to imply some people own more of the resources than others. When a resource is donated to the foundation, we need to emphasize that it belongs to the Foundation, free and clear. * Duty now for the future. ASF projects are meant to live for decades. The current list is already lengthy. What will it look like ten years from now? How much of the contributions of those we list today will really be part of the product then? Tags and lists like these cannot be sustained for the full life of an Apache product. Sadly, we should probably trim the Who We Are page down to the list of Struts Committers who are members of the Jakarta PMC, since these individuals are the legal representatives of the Foundation. In this context, the Struts Committee Members would be presented as the decision-makers rather than the authors. (Technically, what we do is a work for hire, even though we are all unpaid volunteers.) Of course, we'd still give credit where credit is due via the CVS commits, if for no other reason than to retain an audit trail. Of course, a very ambitious attorney could still try to join everyone cited in the CVS log, but the CVS events are shielded by the Committers being the actors, and so it's a horse of a different color. -Ted. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 1.2.0 is tagged and frozen
Ted, I want to start off by saying I look up to you and respect you. I don't consider myself an equal to you or several of the other giants on this project, but I do consider myself part of this community now. In fact, earlier today I changed my email address from [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ;) The way I see it, there is a natural order of things. Normally you start out as a user, then move to a lurker on the dev list. You start to become active on the list. Then you start helping in little ways as a contributer and for the few elite chosen few, the top status as a committer. My personal plan was to take care of some grunt work like author tags/licenses/fixing common maven report errors to make them more usable. Some of that I've already done. Then I planned to specialize in adding unit tests, and as I become more familiar with the inner source code, to make more core contributions. Someday I might even be accepted as a committer. Not to be dramatic, but removing the author tags from the volunteers page itself sends the message that non-committers are an even less important part of the community. There's largely some truth to that, but tt would be disappointing to see the contributors list go away. It's nice to get acknowledgement in CVS and on most of my of patches (but not all), I did get that. As for the legal issues. The Committers being actors is true wether or not people are listed on the page. As for as a list accumulating over decades, the list could always be version(minor or major) specific. Taking a step back, here is how some other projects are dealing with this issue: Tomcat: they don't even deal with such a page and point instead to the overall jakarta whoweare.html which lists committers and project management committee(PMC) members. (http://jakarta.apache.org/site/whoweare.html) Jakarta Logging: list PMC members and committers, with pictures even. I guess jboss isn't the only one to do that. :) (http://logging.apache.org/site/who-we-are.html) Ant: PMC committers So perhaps I'm a singular voice in the wilderness, but removing the author tags from the volunteer page seems to be a decision important enough that a vote might be in order. Regardless of the outcome, I'll still volunteer to take care of it and submit a patch. I would however recommend that if the changes are made, the page be retitled, from volunteers to whoweare. After seeing other projects, I can definitely see the other side on this one. The bottom line is that I like feeling a part of this project and the only difference is how easy it to defend that position to myself or outsiders. So I'll list the possible options(perhaps there are others I haven't realized): 1] continue maintining volunteers with list of contributers like now instead of author tags a] leave sorted as now b]move list of sourcedoc contributers to bottom of page. below commiters list description c]move contributers list to a seperate page that is only linked to from bottom of the page. 2] remove source document contributers from voluntters page a] leaving page called volunteers b] changing page to whoweare 3] remove page entirely and point the link to the jakarta whoweare page Paul Sundling Ted Husted wrote: On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 11:23:08 -0800, Paul Sundling wrote: I should probably still remove author tags from the docs and consolidate those into the volunteers page also. I'm afraid that our volunteers page is subject to the same considerations as the author tags. :( * Low hanging suit. In the unlikely event of a law suit, this is a (very) convenient list of parties to join to the action. We may think it's silly, but it is what an attorney would do. Each of these people would then be responsible for having themselves severed from the suit. (Guilty until proven innocent, I'm afraid.) The ASF would do what they could, but resources are limited; we shouldn't tempt fate. * No strings attached. An important ASF principle is that all the code and documentation belong to the Foundation and its Community. Tags and other credits tend to imply some people own more of the resources than others. When a resource is donated to the foundation, we need to emphasize that it belongs to the Foundation, free and clear. * Duty now for the future. ASF projects are meant to live for decades. The current list is already lengthy. What will it look like ten years from now? How much of the contributions of those we list today will really be part of the product then? Tags and lists like these cannot be sustained for the full life of an Apache product. Sadly, we should probably trim the Who We Are page down to the list of Struts Committers who are members of the Jakarta PMC, since these individuals are the legal representatives of the Foundation. In this context, the Struts Committee Members would be presented as the decision-makers rather than the authors. (Technically, what
Re: 1.2.0 is tagged and frozen
Struts is a community and as such its important to know the roles people play in that community - people need to know or be able to find out who the comitters are and, just as importantly, who they are not. If I'm discussing submitting a change to struts - knowing whether people encourging/discouraging you are committers or not makes a difference when deciding if its worth trying or not. Also, since committers have only get to that status by proving their value to this community, their opinions get more respect. I also think acknowledgement of contributors is a positive thing - it is also good for the community and encourages participation. We can spend our lives in fear of what might happen but it has to be balanced with what is good for the struts community. I say keep the Who We Are and Contributors pages. Niall - Original Message - From: Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Struts Developers List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2004 11:46 AM Subject: Re: 1.2.0 is tagged and frozen On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 11:23:08 -0800, Paul Sundling wrote: I should probably still remove author tags from the docs and consolidate those into the volunteers page also. I'm afraid that our volunteers page is subject to the same considerations as the author tags. :( * Low hanging suit. In the unlikely event of a law suit, this is a (very) convenient list of parties to join to the action. We may think it's silly, but it is what an attorney would do. Each of these people would then be responsible for having themselves severed from the suit. (Guilty until proven innocent, I'm afraid.) The ASF would do what they could, but resources are limited; we shouldn't tempt fate. * No strings attached. An important ASF principle is that all the code and documentation belong to the Foundation and its Community. Tags and other credits tend to imply some people own more of the resources than others. When a resource is donated to the foundation, we need to emphasize that it belongs to the Foundation, free and clear. * Duty now for the future. ASF projects are meant to live for decades. The current list is already lengthy. What will it look like ten years from now? How much of the contributions of those we list today will really be part of the product then? Tags and lists like these cannot be sustained for the full life of an Apache product. Sadly, we should probably trim the Who We Are page down to the list of Struts Committers who are members of the Jakarta PMC, since these individuals are the legal representatives of the Foundation. In this context, the Struts Committee Members would be presented as the decision-makers rather than the authors. (Technically, what we do is a work for hire, even though we are all unpaid volunteers.) Of course, we'd still give credit where credit is due via the CVS commits, if for no other reason than to retain an audit trail. Of course, a very ambitious attorney could still try to join everyone cited in the CVS log, but the CVS events are shielded by the Committers being the actors, and so it's a horse of a different color. -Ted. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 1.2.0 is tagged and frozen
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 06:26:47 -0800, Paul Sundling wrote: Taking a step back, here is how some other projects are dealing with this issue: The example I'd be most willing to follow would be the one set by the httpd project: http://httpd.apache.org/contributors/ IMHO, these are the true giants around here :) -Ted. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 1.2.0 is tagged and frozen
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 22:38:24 -0800 (PST), Martin Cooper wrote: Actually, with this new release strategy, where should the announcement message go, since it's not a Final release? The same lists, or a subset? Thoughts? Following Craig's description of the Tomcat release approach (copy below), I'd say we should make an announcement to the Struts DEV and USER lists, with an URL leading to one of our home directories (or wherever Tomcat and others have been posting such things), but not the Jakarta announcement list. I imagine we'd now reserve the latter for a General Availability release that's being mirrored. Sorry if the taglib-exercise module is flaky. If it is, mea culpa. But once it's up there, we can still announce it, see if there is anything else we can fix, and then try again with 1.2.1. That would also give us a chance to apply that license patch. -Ted. On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 11:27:45 -0800, Craig R. McClanahan wrote: The Tomcat folks do indeed vote on every release -- they just do things in a little different order: * Post what amounts to a release candidate and announce to a limited audience (dev and user lists) asking for testing. * Testing ensues ... * Call a vote on the release, with the options to call it alpha, beta, stable (that's fine with me), or withdraw (if there was some bad problem). * Announce to the world and do the usual process of distributing the bits. The same approach would work for us, and IMHO meets the Jakarta requirements with one additional wrinkle -- the Jakarta PMC needs the opportunity to vote on releases as well, to be consistent with the current ASF reqirements. On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 22:38:24 -0800 (PST), Martin Cooper wrote: The release is built, but I have a couple of problems. 1) My ISP has gone flaky on me, and I haven't been able to upload it to minotaur. They claim the problems should be fixed tomorrow, so hopefully I'll be able to upload it then. 2) Some of the exercise-taglibs tests are failing: 2a) bean:include fails because it is trying to include welcome.html, but there is no such file. 2b) html:img fails because there are no images in the struts- examples web app at all. 2c) html:messages fails with a lot of nulls in the test table. It looks like all of these are probably issues with the test app itself, rather than the tags, so I'm not overly concerned, and suspect we probably should go ahead with 1.2.0 anyway, especially since we're not claiming it's a final release. Once I get the build uploaded, I'll ask other folks to take it for a spin before sending out an announcement. Actually, with this new release strategy, where should the announcement message go, since it's not a Final release? The same lists, or a subset? Thoughts? -- Martin Cooper - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 1.2.0 is tagged and frozen
On Mon, 23 Feb 2004, Ted Husted wrote: On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 22:38:24 -0800 (PST), Martin Cooper wrote: Actually, with this new release strategy, where should the announcement message go, since it's not a Final release? The same lists, or a subset? Thoughts? Following Craig's description of the Tomcat release approach (copy below), I'd say we should make an announcement to the Struts DEV and USER lists, with an URL leading to one of our home directories (or wherever Tomcat and others have been posting such things), but not the Jakarta announcement list. I imagine we'd now reserve the latter for a General Availability release that's being mirrored. I'm fine with restricting the announcement as you describe. However, given the size of the struts-user list in particular, I'm not so sure about not taking advantage of mirroring for downloads. I'll take a look at what the Tomcat folks are doing in this regard, though, and just do what they do. ;-) Sorry if the taglib-exercise module is flaky. If it is, mea culpa. But once it's up there, we can still announce it, see if there is anything else we can fix, and then try again with 1.2.1. That would also give us a chance to apply that license patch. No biggie. As I said, I'm not overly concerned by the failures I saw, although I do want to verify that the problems with (2c) are also test app problems and not actual bugs in the core. I'll try to check that tonight, but I'd be happy if someone else beat me to it. ;-) Once I get the build uploaded (grr!), I'd like someone to try out the Cactus tests and make sure that most of them, at least, run OK before I send out an announcement. After 1.2.0 is out of the gate, we can apply Paul's license patches, as you suggest. Per Greg's board summary, we'll want to make sure we have the license on all applicable files. Also, since the board is now officially discouraging the use of @author tags, I'd like to see us remove those too. -- Martin Cooper -Ted. On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 11:27:45 -0800, Craig R. McClanahan wrote: The Tomcat folks do indeed vote on every release -- they just do things in a little different order: * Post what amounts to a release candidate and announce to a limited audience (dev and user lists) asking for testing. * Testing ensues ... * Call a vote on the release, with the options to call it alpha, beta, stable (that's fine with me), or withdraw (if there was some bad problem). * Announce to the world and do the usual process of distributing the bits. The same approach would work for us, and IMHO meets the Jakarta requirements with one additional wrinkle -- the Jakarta PMC needs the opportunity to vote on releases as well, to be consistent with the current ASF reqirements. On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 22:38:24 -0800 (PST), Martin Cooper wrote: The release is built, but I have a couple of problems. 1) My ISP has gone flaky on me, and I haven't been able to upload it to minotaur. They claim the problems should be fixed tomorrow, so hopefully I'll be able to upload it then. 2) Some of the exercise-taglibs tests are failing: 2a) bean:include fails because it is trying to include welcome.html, but there is no such file. 2b) html:img fails because there are no images in the struts- examples web app at all. 2c) html:messages fails with a lot of nulls in the test table. It looks like all of these are probably issues with the test app itself, rather than the tags, so I'm not overly concerned, and suspect we probably should go ahead with 1.2.0 anyway, especially since we're not claiming it's a final release. Once I get the build uploaded, I'll ask other folks to take it for a spin before sending out an announcement. Actually, with this new release strategy, where should the announcement message go, since it's not a Final release? The same lists, or a subset? Thoughts? -- Martin Cooper - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 1.2.0 is tagged and frozen
Here is what I understood (and used with Validator) Action Response Step #0) Vote for release process to start. RM begins grueling work. Step #1) A release is made. An announcement made on DEVSavvy users download, test. #2) After a period of time A VOTE is held. Release withdrawn. Release promoted to LA Release promoted to GA. #3) Step #2 repeated for same release. LA = Announced on Apache only, STRUTS-DEV, STRUTS-USER GA = Announce inside/outside Apache STRUTS-DEV/STRUTS-USER/Slashdot/Theserverside/freshmeat. At any time Step #2 may be repeated for the same release. So it can be promoted from LA to GA, GA to LA, or Withdrawn. Note that there is no confusing Release Canidates, all releases are releases. Step #0 is required becasue we are part of Jakarta Step #1, #2, #3 is what httpd uses. (I had typed this up earlier but my email timed out, gurr!) -Original Message- From: Martin Cooper [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 23, 2004 05:42 PM To: 'Struts Developers List' Subject: Re: 1.2.0 is tagged and frozen On Mon, 23 Feb 2004, Ted Husted wrote: On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 22:38:24 -0800 (PST), Martin Cooper wrote: Actually, with this new release strategy, where should the announcement message go, since it's not a Final release? The same lists, or a subset? Thoughts? Following Craig's description of the Tomcat release approach (copy below), I'd say we should make an announcement to the Struts DEV and USER lists, with an URL leading to one of our home directories (or wherever Tomcat and others have been posting such things), but not the Jakarta announcement list. I imagine we'd now reserve the latter for a General Availability release that's being mirrored. I'm fine with restricting the announcement as you describe. However, given the size of the struts-user list in particular, I'm not so sure about not taking advantage of mirroring for downloads. I'll take a look at what the Tomcat folks are doing in this regard, though, and just do what they do. ;-) Sorry if the taglib-exercise module is flaky. If it is, mea culpa. But once it's up there, we can still announce it, see if there is anything else we can fix, and then try again with 1.2.1. That would also give us a chance to apply that license patch. No biggie. As I said, I'm not overly concerned by the failures I saw, although I do want to verify that the problems with (2c) are also test app problems and not actual bugs in the core. I'll try to check that tonight, but I'd be happy if someone else beat me to it. ;-) Once I get the build uploaded (grr!), I'd like someone to try out the Cactus tests and make sure that most of them, at least, run OK before I send out an announcement. After 1.2.0 is out of the gate, we can apply Paul's license patches, as you suggest. Per Greg's board summary, we'll want to make sure we have the license on all applicable files. Also, since the board is now officially discouraging the use of @author tags, I'd like to see us remove those too. -- Martin Cooper -Ted. On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 11:27:45 -0800, Craig R. McClanahan wrote: The Tomcat folks do indeed vote on every release -- they just do things in a little different order: * Post what amounts to a release candidate and announce to a limited audience (dev and user lists) asking for testing. * Testing ensues ... * Call a vote on the release, with the options to call it alpha, beta, stable (that's fine with me), or withdraw (if there was some bad problem). * Announce to the world and do the usual process of distributing the bits. The same approach would work for us, and IMHO meets the Jakarta requirements with one additional wrinkle -- the Jakarta PMC needs the opportunity to vote on releases as well, to be consistent with the current ASF reqirements. On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 22:38:24 -0800 (PST), Martin Cooper wrote: The release is built, but I have a couple of problems. 1) My ISP has gone flaky on me, and I haven't been able to upload it to minotaur. They claim the problems should be fixed tomorrow, so hopefully I'll be able to upload it then. 2) Some of the exercise-taglibs tests are failing: 2a) bean:include fails because it is trying to include welcome.html, but there is no such file. 2b) html:img fails because there are no images in the struts- examples web app at all. 2c) html:messages fails with a lot of nulls in the test table. It looks like all of these are probably issues with the test app itself, rather than the tags, so I'm not overly concerned, and suspect we probably should go ahead with 1.2.0 anyway, especially since we're not claiming it's a final release
Re: 1.2.0 is tagged and frozen
Quoting Martin Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Mon, 23 Feb 2004, Ted Husted wrote: On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 22:38:24 -0800 (PST), Martin Cooper wrote: Actually, with this new release strategy, where should the announcement message go, since it's not a Final release? The same lists, or a subset? Thoughts? Following Craig's description of the Tomcat release approach (copy below), I'd say we should make an announcement to the Struts DEV and USER lists, with an URL leading to one of our home directories (or wherever Tomcat and others have been posting such things), but not the Jakarta announcement list. I imagine we'd now reserve the latter for a General Availability release that's being mirrored. I'm fine with restricting the announcement as you describe. However, given the size of the struts-user list in particular, I'm not so sure about not taking advantage of mirroring for downloads. I'll take a look at what the Tomcat folks are doing in this regard, though, and just do what they do. ;-) They do what Ted mentioned -- just go to the DEV and USER lists with test announcements, asking for feedback. The tomcat-user list (2512 subscribers) is somewhat smaller than ours (2948 subscribers) but I suspect that the number of people who will actually download and test an alpha release will be fairly small. If it's not, we'll know enough to mirror next time. Sorry if the taglib-exercise module is flaky. If it is, mea culpa. But once it's up there, we can still announce it, see if there is anything else we can fix, and then try again with 1.2.1. That would also give us a chance to apply that license patch. No biggie. As I said, I'm not overly concerned by the failures I saw, although I do want to verify that the problems with (2c) are also test app problems and not actual bugs in the core. I'll try to check that tonight, but I'd be happy if someone else beat me to it. ;-) Once I get the build uploaded (grr!), I'd like someone to try out the Cactus tests and make sure that most of them, at least, run OK before I send out an announcement. After 1.2.0 is out of the gate, we can apply Paul's license patches, as you suggest. Per Greg's board summary, we'll want to make sure we have the license on all applicable files. Also, since the board is now officially discouraging the use of @author tags, I'd like to see us remove those too. +1 -- Martin Cooper Craig - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 1.2.0 is tagged and frozen
As an aside to Joe, the person who was bringing up the licenses a couple weeks ago was me. :) From what I read on the instructions for the license file stuff I also need to update the xml that is transformed into our documentation and add a comment to that as well. I'll submit another patch for the contrib. Given how many pieces I had to break the main src patch into, it might be less confusing for me to open seperate bugzilla entries for the docs and contrib. Anyone have any thoughts on that? Do you think we need to go as far as properties files? Then there's stuff like stuts-config I guess it should have the header too. It's not as onerous with the new license at least. I should probably still remove author tags from the docs and consolidate those into the volunteers page also. I volunteer to take care of that. Several weeks ago I thought we were closer than we were to the 1.2 release and thought it might be a good idea to wait until after the release to make sweeping changes like those that touched a lot of files. The only @author tags in java source are in contrib and org.apache.struts.webapp.upload.UploadAction is the only class in the core distrubution with an author tag. It was added after I swept the main source. I am generally pretty detailed. :) So I'm raring to go on those. Let me know when I can start working on patches for these items. Paul Sundling After 1.2.0 is out of the gate, we can apply Paul's license patches, as you suggest. Per Greg's board summary, we'll want to make sure we have the license on all applicable files. Also, since the board is now officially discouraging the use of @author tags, I'd like to see us remove those too. -- Martin Cooper - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
1.2.0 is tagged and frozen
Please hold off on all checkins until the release is done. Thanks. -- Martin Cooper - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 1.2.0 is tagged and frozen
The release is built, but I have a couple of problems. 1) My ISP has gone flaky on me, and I haven't been able to upload it to minotaur. They claim the problems should be fixed tomorrow, so hopefully I'll be able to upload it then. 2) Some of the exercise-taglibs tests are failing: 2a) bean:include fails because it is trying to include welcome.html, but there is no such file. 2b) html:img fails because there are no images in the struts-examples web app at all. 2c) html:messages fails with a lot of nulls in the test table. It looks like all of these are probably issues with the test app itself, rather than the tags, so I'm not overly concerned, and suspect we probably should go ahead with 1.2.0 anyway, especially since we're not claiming it's a final release. Once I get the build uploaded, I'll ask other folks to take it for a spin before sending out an announcement. Actually, with this new release strategy, where should the announcement message go, since it's not a Final release? The same lists, or a subset? Thoughts? -- Martin Cooper On Sun, 22 Feb 2004, Martin Cooper wrote: Please hold off on all checkins until the release is done. Thanks. -- Martin Cooper - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
