Re: [] Apache Jena 3.7.0 RC1

Sent report under RC2 issue. I will take this conversation there. On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 10:18 AM, Andy Seaborne wrote: > I grabbed the latest version of maven so as to run with exactly the same > version of maven. Building current development (reset to 3.7.0-SNAPSHOT) >

Re: [] Apache Jena 3.7.0 RC1

I grabbed the latest version of maven so as to run with exactly the same version of maven. Building current development (reset to 3.7.0-SNAPSHOT) worked for me. The javadoc doc for 3.7.0 is already loaded onto jena.staging. We now have 4 (if you include jenkins) independent reports of

Re: [CANCELLED] Apache Jena 3.7.0 RC1

Following up on the NPE I reported. I switched to the original RC1 code and had the same issue. Intiial run reported: [INFO] --- maven-javadoc-plugin:3.0.0:jar (attach-javadocs) @ jena-base --- [INFO] The goal 'org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-javadoc-plugin:3.0.0:javadoc' has not been previously

Re: [CANCELLED] Apache Jena 3.7.0 RC1

There is a fix in PR#391. I've run the test case umpteen times now without incident and done performance times of bulkloading, which is about as write intensive as it gets. The worse slow down I observed (difference of a 3.6 and 3.7-fix) when loading 25M BSBM triples was 3%. Usually it's

Re: [SUSPENDED] Apache Jena 3.7.0 RC1

My home system has crashed and I am not at work tomorrow so i will be offline for the next 36 hrs or so. On 3 Apr 2018 23:01, "Andy Seaborne" wrote: > JENA-1516 looks serious and fixable. > > I'd like time to verify the fix that I have. As is often the case, finding > the

Re: [SUSPENDED] Apache Jena 3.7.0 RC1

JENA-1516 looks serious and fixable. I'd like time to verify the fix that I have. As is often the case, finding the concurrency problem is a lot more time consuming than fixing an identified problem. The WIP fix is available at https://github.com/afs/jena/tree/jena-1516_ObjectFileStorage

Re: [] Apache Jena 3.7.0 RC1

On 03/04/18 18:15, Andy Seaborne wrote: 1/ This is 3.8.0-SNAPSHOT - not the release candidate. 2/ Jenkins has been building 3.8.0-SNAPSHOT including javadoc. 3/ It says it is in the javadoc plugin: """ org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-javadoc-plugin:3.0.0:jar failed.: NullPointerException ->

Re: [] Apache Jena 3.7.0 RC1

1/ This is 3.8.0-SNAPSHOT - not the release candidate. 2/ Jenkins has been building 3.8.0-SNAPSHOT including javadoc. 3/ It says it is in the javadoc plugin: """ org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-javadoc-plugin:3.0.0:jar failed.: NullPointerException -> [Help 1] """ so we have very little

Re: [] Apache Jena 3.7.0 RC1

Sorry, should have added: openjdk version "1.8.0_162" OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_162-8u162-b12-0ubuntu0.16.04.2-b12) OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.162-b12, mixed mode) Linux claude-XPS-15-9560 4.13.0-37-generic #42~16.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Mar 7 16:03:28 UTC 2018 x86_64 x86_64

Re: [] Apache Jena 3.7.0 RC1

Compile on Ubuntu with clone from git fails. mvn clean install -Pdev success mvn clean install fails with: [INFO] --- maven-javadoc-plugin:3.0.0:jar (attach-javadocs) @ jena-base --- [INFO] The goal 'org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-javadoc-plugin:3.0.0:javadoc' has not been previously called

Re: [] Apache Jena 3.7.0 RC1

Semantic Versioning says nothing about source vs binary compatibility. The reason for having minor version normally is allow some evolution. Jena 3.7.0 is not a patch release. It is highlighted in "heads up" message to users@jena:

Re: [VOTE] Apache Jena 3.7.0 RC1

Please see the discussions on the JIRA about source code compatibility. JENA-1389 https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/362 JENA-1495 https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/368 Where is that other discussion? A link would be helpful. Andy On 02/04/18 10:03, Claude Warren wrote: Should this

Re: [VOTE] Apache Jena 3.7.0 RC1

Should this not be released as a 4.0 version as I think we operate under semantic versioning and the API is not backwards compatible? There was a similar discussion over in Commons recently where several of the functions there were changed to return "this" rather than "void". Like our changes

Re: [VOTE] Apache Jena 3.7.0 RC1

> Please vote to approve this release: > > [ ] +1 Approve the release +1 > [ ] 0 Don't care > [ ] -1 Don't release, because ... > + does everything work on OS X? Yes. > + are the GPG signatures fine? Yes. > + is there a source archive? Yes. > + can the source archive

Re: [VOTE] Apache Jena 3.7.0 RC1

Downloaded https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=jena.git;a=commit;h=d4e7063e ; mvn clean package; and tested by running jena-fuseki-basic on Mac OS X 10.13.3, Oracle jdk 1.8.0_162. > Please vote to approve this

Re: [VOTE] Apache Jena 3.7.0 RC1

Please vote to approve this release:    [ ] +1 Approve the release    [ ]  0 Don't care    [ ] -1 Don't release, because ... +1 This vote will be open until at least    2018-04-01 22:00 UTC

[VOTE] Apache Jena 3.7.0 RC1

Hi, Here is a vote on a release of Jena 3.7.0. This is the first proposed candidate for a 3.7.0 release. There are process changes. Deadline: 2018-04-01 22:00 UTC April 1st! Process Changes 1/ MD5 files are being discouraged because MD5 is not secure. Projects are now asked