Thanks to everyone for making it happen!
On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 6:52 AM, Dmitriy Pavlov
wrote:
> Hi Anton, Alexander, Denis, Nikita, Pavel,
>
> It is very good contribution. It resolved license issue with JCache 1.0.
>
> Thank you guys for making this happen.
>
> Sincerely,
> Dmitriy Pavlov
>
>
Hi Anton, Alexander, Denis, Nikita, Pavel,
It is very good contribution. It resolved license issue with JCache 1.0.
Thank you guys for making this happen.
Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov
чт, 2 авг. 2018 г. в 16:37, Anton Vinogradov :
> Igniters,
>
> We officially support JCache 1.1 now [1].
>
> Huge
Igniters,
We officially support JCache 1.1 now [1].
Huge thanks to everyone who hepled us:
- Alexander Menshikov
- Denis Garus
- Amelchev Nikita
- Pavel Pereslegin
[1]
https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=1578758&tab=queuedBuildOverviewTab
чт, 19 июл. 2018 г. в 16:12, Vyacheslav Da
Hi, Alex!
Could you also help with the ticket [1]? If you have time.
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9020
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 4:50 PM Denis Magda wrote:
>
> Pavel,
>
> Could you chime in please?
>
> --
> Denis
>
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 6:43 AM Nikita Amelchev
> wrote:
>
Pavel,
Could you chime in please?
--
Denis
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 6:43 AM Nikita Amelchev
wrote:
> Hi, Igniters.
>
> I'm implementing new version TCK 1.1 and I found the problem [1] in the
> .NET module.
>
> In brief, .NET creates cache entry event based on values exist checking.
>
> TCK 1.1
Hi, Igniters.
I'm implementing new version TCK 1.1 and I found the problem [1] in the
.NET module.
In brief, .NET creates cache entry event based on values exist checking.
TCK 1.1 says that getValue() not null for REMOVE/EXPIRED events if old
value required and it breaks logic.
I'm looking for
Denis, I think we can include it to a minor release. Because the network
protocol, API, binary compatibility will be saved. And all behavior
changes, in fact, make implementation closer to the documentation of JCache
1.0. Because TCK 1.1.0 in general fixes differents between documentation
and tests
Guys, are you targeting this for the next big Ignite release? Should be in
3 m from now.
--
Denis
On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 2:58 AM Anton Vinogradov wrote:
> Corrected IEP URL:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-21%3A+JCache+1.1+support
>
> чт, 14 июн. 2018 г. в 12:48, Але
Corrected IEP URL:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-21%3A+JCache+1.1+support
чт, 14 июн. 2018 г. в 12:48, Александр Меньшиков :
> Igniters,
>
> I've prepared IEP-21 [1] for this JCache updating task.
> It will help us to manage the issues and see the progress in one place.
>
Igniters,
I've prepared IEP-21 [1] for this JCache updating task.
It will help us to manage the issues and see the progress in one place.
Also, we have finally added tests for TCK 1.1.0 [2] to our TC which can be
run on any branch.
Both tests cases (for 1.0.1 and for 1.1.0) will coexist until IEP-
Agree, I see zero benefits of being compliant with both specification
versions. Let’s just focus on the latest one.
Denis
On Tuesday, June 5, 2018, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> Alex,
>
> I think it is OK to break TCK 1.0.1 tests in favor of TCK 1.1. Once we
> finish the migration, I would remove
Alex,
I think it is OK to break TCK 1.0.1 tests in favor of TCK 1.1. Once we
finish the migration, I would remove the TCK 1.0.1 test suite altogether.
D.
On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 11:13 AM, Александр Меньшиков
wrote:
> Okay. There are tests results:
>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?b
Okay. There are tests results:
https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=1361493&tab=buildResultsDiv&buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_JCacheTck11
It's the same as locally.
Also, I have created sub-tasks for all problems we have:
1) CacheManagerTest.getUnsafeTypedCacheRequest failed.
https
Agree with Nikolay we should create build plan, and we can use this build
plan in developement branch.
Merge to master is not necessary before issue is ready.
вт, 5 июн. 2018 г. в 14:04, Nikolay Izhikov :
> Alex, please try to run this build plan for your branch
>
>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.or
Alex, please try to run this build plan for your branch
https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_JCacheTck11
В Вт, 05/06/2018 в 13:56 +0300, Nikolay Izhikov пишет:
> Guys, we had a private talk with Vyacheslav and Dmitriy Pavlov.
> Here are its resulst:
>
> 1. I
Guys, we had a private talk with Vyacheslav and Dmitriy Pavlov.
Here are its resulst:
1. I will create JCache1.1 build plan.
I will be able to run tests with Alex new profile enabled.
So, Alex can run and share with community tests results both for jcache 1.0 and
jcache 1.1.
2. Alex, please, cr
AFAIK TeamCity is not able to create such build-plan on the fly.
Moreover, we will not be able to test master branch in both profiles
in this case.
Am I miss something?
On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 1:31 PM, Nikolay Izhikov wrote:
> Vyacheslav,
>
> Let's create build plan on TC for this profile.
> Why
Vyacheslav,
Let's create build plan on TC for this profile.
Why we need to merge it in master now?
В Вт, 05/06/2018 в 13:29 +0300, Vyacheslav Daradur пишет:
> Nikolay, there isn't anything broken in PR.
>
> The PR is needed to add new build-plan on TC.
>
> We need tools to check that fixes for
Nikolay, there isn't anything broken in PR.
The PR is needed to add new build-plan on TC.
We need tools to check that fixes for 1.1 don't break compatibility with 1.0.
On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 1:21 PM, Кузнецов Алексей Львович
wrote:
> Hi
>
> After Alexander create separate tickets for failed tes
Hi
After Alexander create separate tickets for failed tests, everybody is
free to fix them.
So we can proceed faster issue resolving.
Hello, Igniters.
Actually, I don't understand why we should merge in master something broken.
Currently, Ignite is not ready for JCache 1.1.
Only change I see
Hello, Igniters.
Actually, I don't understand why we should merge in master something broken.
Currently, Ignite is not ready for JCache 1.1.
Only change I see in PR is new profile [1].
Is it required to have it to continue jcache 1.1 support implementation?
I think Alexandex can proceed with cur
Hi Alexander,
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-8687 is 'In progress'. Is it
expected?
Nikolay, have you some time to apply patch, if it passes review?
Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov
вт, 5 июн. 2018 г. в 5:09, Dmitriy Setrakyan :
> Thanks, Alex! Sounds like a good plan.
>
> On Mon, Jun 4
Thanks, Alex! Sounds like a good plan.
On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 5:52 AM, Александр Меньшиков
wrote:
> Hi,
> Igniters!
>
> I have taken a look at the jcache 1.1 spec and TCK.
> And I can write a brief summary of my plan to solve the task.
>
> I have found 6 problems in current master with TCK 1.1 (
Hi,
Igniters!
I have taken a look at the jcache 1.1 spec and TCK.
And I can write a brief summary of my plan to solve the task.
I have found 6 problems in current master with TCK 1.1 (104 failed tests).
Of course, we should run this TCK on CI to be absolutely sure we didn't
miss something.
So th
Thanks, Slava. You are right.
2018-05-23 14:00 GMT+03:00 Vyacheslav Daradur :
> Hi, Alex!
>
> Please have a look at maven profile named "jcache-tck".
>
> I believe this is what you are looking for.
>
> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 11:50 AM, Александр Меньшиков
> wrote:
> > Igniters,
> > I think I can
Hi, Alex!
Please have a look at maven profile named "jcache-tck".
I believe this is what you are looking for.
On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 11:50 AM, Александр Меньшиков
wrote:
> Igniters,
> I think I can do it. As I see we already have JCache TCK tests in TC.
> Can I take somewhere settings/script w
Igniters,
I think I can do it. As I see we already have JCache TCK tests in TC.
Can I take somewhere settings/script which we are using?
2018-05-23 2:58 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan :
> Igniters,
>
> It will be great if someone in the community would pick this up. The amount
> of changes are minim
Igniters,
It will be great if someone in the community would pick this up. The amount
of changes are minimal and many of them only have to do with clarifying the
documentation. However, removing JSR 107 license confusion in 1.1 would be
great for Ignite.
D.
On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 3:04 PM, Denis
Here is a list of all changes:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/jsr107/BC1qKqknzKU
The primary argument for the migration is a license. JCache 1.0 is licensed
by Oracle that causes legal issues for some of the users. Once we upgrade
to JCache 1.1 the won't longer be a big deal.
However, on
Hi Denis,
What was improved in JCache 1.1?
Would it be useful for product to change supported spec. version?
Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov
пн, 21 мая 2018 г. в 20:12, Denis Magda :
> Igniters,
>
> Eventually, JCache was relicensed to Apache 2.0 and released 1.1 version:
> https://groups.google.com
Igniters,
Eventually, JCache was relicensed to Apache 2.0 and released 1.1 version:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/jsr107/BC1qKqknzKU
Is there anyone interested in upgrading Ignite to the new version for the
next release?
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-8548
--
Denis
31 matches
Mail list logo