Hi Guys,
Alrighty, that's 4 binding votes (Sami, Andrzej, me, and Dennis), so I
think we can safely move forward with the release process. I will finish the
release up when I get back to my home computer tonight (~5pm Pacific
Standard Time, Los Angeles).
Thanks, and I will get this thing wrappe
Yeah, I agree, I just didn't know how to proceed with the new branch
structure. I will go ahead and put it into the trunk if there are no
objections from anyone.
Dennis
Andrzej Bialecki wrote:
Dennis Kubes wrote:
That works. I created the JIRA and attached your patch. It passes
all build
Chris Mattmann wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> I have posted a candidate for the Apache Nutch 0.9 release at
>
> http://people.apache.org/~mattmann/nutch_0.9/rc2/
> Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache Nutch 0.9.
+1
--
Sami Siren
Dennis Kubes wrote:
That works. I created the JIRA and attached your patch. It passes all
build tests and works on my 150K run across my 5 machine dev cluster.
Should we go ahead and commit this?
Well, we certainly have to commit it to trunk, but not to branch-0.9 -
as we keep testing and d
That works. I created the JIRA and attached your patch. It passes all
build tests and works on my 150K run across my 5 machine dev cluster.
Should we go ahead and commit this?
Dennis
Andrzej Bialecki wrote:
Dennis Kubes wrote:
Ok, I ran some bigger test crawls > 150K with the 0.9RC. Everyt
[X] +1 Release the packages as Apache Nutch 0.9
[ ] -1 Do not release the packages because...
Andrzej Bialecki wrote:
Chris Mattmann wrote:
[..]
[ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache Nutch 0.9
[ ] -1 Do not release the packages because...
+1.
Chris Mattmann wrote:
[..]
[ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache Nutch 0.9
[ ] -1 Do not release the packages because...
+1.
--
Best regards,
Andrzej Bialecki <><
___. ___ ___ ___ _ _ __
[__ || __|__/|__||\/| Information Retrieval, Semantic Web
___|||__
Dennis Kubes wrote:
Ok, I ran some bigger test crawls > 150K with the 0.9RC. Everything
worked fine (inject, generate, fetch, updatedb, readdb, linkdb,
mergesegs, mergdb, merge, index) except delete duplicates on which I am
getting this error when running against segment indexes on the DFS.
Ok, I ran some bigger test crawls > 150K with the 0.9RC. Everything
worked fine (inject, generate, fetch, updatedb, readdb, linkdb,
mergesegs, mergdb, merge, index) except delete duplicates on which I am
getting this error when running against segment indexes on the DFS.
Because of the way I
Folks,
As an FYI, here is a link to the log of the steps that I followed to get to
this point in the release:
http://people.apache.org/~mattmann/NUTCH_0.9_release_log_v2.doc
Cheers,
Chris
On 4/2/07 10:52 PM, "Chris Mattmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> I have posted a can
Hi Folks,
I have posted a candidate for the Apache Nutch 0.9 release at
http://people.apache.org/~mattmann/nutch_0.9/rc2/
See the included CHANGES-0.9.txt file for details on release
contents and latest changes. The release was made from the 0.9-dev trunk,
including the recent patch applied
Chris Mattmann wrote:
Hi Guys,
I think we're discussing about the same thing(improving the process), I
just don't think 0.9 is out yet :)
But to wrap it up for me:
+1 for creating 0.9 branch after fixing the bug (and removing the tag),
creating new rc
and starting a vote.
+1.
+1.
So,
Hi Guys,
>> I think we're discussing about the same thing(improving the process), I
>> just don't think 0.9 is out yet :)
>>
>>
>> But to wrap it up for me:
>>
>> +1 for creating 0.9 branch after fixing the bug (and removing the tag),
>> creating new rc
>> and starting a vote.
>
>
> +1.
+1.
Sami Siren wrote:
> The branch should have been done when we kind fixed
> the features for 0.9. not when the first rc is cut.
That's the past for me. We're discussing how we should modify the
procedure to get the best results in the future, given the team and the
momentum we have now.
I think
> The branch should have been done when we kind fixed
> the features for 0.9. not when the first rc is cut.
That's the past for me. We're discussing how we should modify the
procedure to get the best results in the future, given the team and the
momentum we have now.
I think we're discussing a
Sami Siren wrote:
2007/3/29, Andrzej Bialecki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Sami Siren wrote:
> 2007/3/29, Andrzej Bialecki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>> Sami Siren wrote:
>>
>> > IMO we should have had a 0.9-rc1 tag, apply patch to trunk, have
>> > 0.9-rc2 tag and so on until we are satisfied.
>> >
>> > T
2007/3/29, Andrzej Bialecki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Sami Siren wrote:
> 2007/3/29, Andrzej Bialecki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>> Sami Siren wrote:
>>
>> > IMO we should have had a 0.9-rc1 tag, apply patch to trunk, have
>> > 0.9-rc2 tag and so on until we are satisfied.
>> >
>> > Then when we're actu
Sami Siren wrote:
2007/3/29, Andrzej Bialecki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Sami Siren wrote:
> IMO we should have had a 0.9-rc1 tag, apply patch to trunk, have
> 0.9-rc2 tag and so on until we are satisfied.
>
> Then when we're actually satisfied create tag for 0.9 (copy from rc
> that got promoted).
2007/3/29, Andrzej Bialecki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Sami Siren wrote:
> IMO we should have had a 0.9-rc1 tag, apply patch to trunk, have
> 0.9-rc2 tag and so on until we are satisfied.
>
> Then when we're actually satisfied create tag for 0.9 (copy from rc
> that got promoted).
>
> What is the ben
Sami Siren wrote:
IMO we should have had a 0.9-rc1 tag, apply patch to trunk, have
0.9-rc2 tag and so on until we are satisfied.
Then when we're actually satisfied create tag for 0.9 (copy from rc
that got promoted).
What is the benefit of using a branch before a release?
That you don't with
2007/3/28, Andrzej Bialecki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Dennis Kubes wrote:
> Yes. This seems to have fixed the problem. All, do we want to create a
> JIRA and commit this for the 0.9 release?
It should definitely go into the release, and we need a patch for the
trunk/ .
+1
Actually, I'm somewha
Hello,
sounds good. one question is we have taged release-0.9, and this release has
been there in some mirror sites of nutch, and people downloaded this version,
so there would be two nutch-0.9 exist in the world, how could people differ
between them.
Thanks
David
Chris Mattmann ：
> Folk
Chris Mattmann wrote:
Folks,
Discussing this with Andrzej, and reading his email below, I tend to agree
more with this procedure below. I would like to call for a vote to change
the existing as-documented procedure (on the wiki) to branch first, do
testing in branch (apply patches where need
Well, it's just going to add more work for me, but in the end, it's probably
something that needs to be in there. I could go either way on this though,
as in, if we don't commit it, 0.9.1 shouldn't be far off. Here's my +1 for
going ahead and committing it...
On 3/28/07 10:21 AM, "Dennis Kubes" <
Folks,
Discussing this with Andrzej, and reading his email below, I tend to agree
more with this procedure below. I would like to call for a vote to change
the existing as-documented procedure (on the wiki) to branch first, do
testing in branch (apply patches where needed), and then when the bra
Dennis Kubes wrote:
Yes. This seems to have fixed the problem. All, do we want to create a
JIRA and commit this for the 0.9 release?
It should definitely go into the release, and we need a patch for the
trunk/ .
Actually, I'm somewhat surprised that we have tags/release-0.9 but we
don't y
Dennis Kubes wrote:
Yes. This seems to have fixed the problem. All, do we want to create
a JIRA and commit this for the 0.9 release?
FYI, this looks like NUTCH-333:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NUTCH-333.
St.Ack
Dennis
Andrzej Bialecki wrote:
Doğacan Güney wrote:
Hi,
On 3/28/07
Yes. This seems to have fixed the problem. All, do we want to create a
JIRA and commit this for the 0.9 release?
Dennis
Andrzej Bialecki wrote:
Doğacan Güney wrote:
Hi,
On 3/28/07, Dennis Kubes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This is definitely a hadoop problem. This is similar to the classp
Doğacan Güney wrote:
Hi,
On 3/28/07, Dennis Kubes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This is definitely a hadoop problem. This is similar to the classpath
issues that we were encountering before with Hadoop and the
ReductTaskRunner. When I include the nutch-*.jar in the hadoop class
path the errors
Hi,
On 3/28/07, Dennis Kubes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This is definitely a hadoop problem. This is similar to the classpath
issues that we were encountering before with Hadoop and the
ReductTaskRunner. When I include the nutch-*.jar in the hadoop class
path the errors go away. Not a fix bu
This is definitely a hadoop problem. This is similar to the classpath
issues that we were encountering before with Hadoop and the
ReductTaskRunner. When I include the nutch-*.jar in the hadoop class
path the errors go away. Not a fix but it proves the point that this is
an issue with Hadoop
I spoke too soon. Below is the output of errors on mergesegs. This
looks more like a Hadoop issue to me, but I will need to dig into it.
It also may be something that I am doing on my end. This was a merge of
three different crawls of 50K each. I don't know if we want to delay or
go ahead.
[X] +1 Release the packages as Apache Nutch 0.9
[ ] -1 Do not release the packages because...
I have been running some bigger crawls with the release this morning.
Everything looks good.
Dennis Kubes
Chris Mattmann wrote:
Hi Folks,
I have posted a candidate for the Apache Nutch 0.9 release
M
Subject: [VOTE] Release Apache Nutch 0.9
Hi Folks,
I have posted a candidate for the Apache Nutch 0.9 release at
http://people.apache.org/~mattmann/nutch_0.9/
See the included CHANGES-0.9.txt file for details on release
contents and latest changes. The release was made from the 0.9-dev trunk.
Chris Mattmann wrote:
> Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache Nutch 0.9.
> The vote is open for the next 72 hours. Only votes from Nutch
> committers are binding, but everyone is welcome to check the release
> candidate and voice their approval or disapproval. The vote passes if
> at l
Hey Sami,
>
> Well the sum itself is obviously the same :) The point in this is to use
> same
> conventions in Lucene family, not strictly required, but still IMO it just
> looks better.
Okey dok -- I will run the md5sum command, and generate a .md5 for the nutch
release that matches that.
I wi
2007/3/27, Chris Mattmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hi Sami,
> About signatures: I can't find your public gpg key anywhere (to verify
> the signature), not in KEYS file nor in keyservers I checked. Am i just
> blind?
Yeah, in my release log, I actually noted this. I was having a hard time
figuring
I've gone ahead and figured out how to generate my GPG public key :-) It
wasn't as hard as I thought. Anyways, I placed my gpg.txt file in:
~mattmann/gpg.txt
On people.apache.org. I've also added my GPG key to the KEYS file in the
nutch dist directory, /www/www.apache.org/dist/lucene/nutch/, usin
Hi Sami,
> A very limited acid test shows that I can do crawling and searching
> through web app so that part is ok.
Great! Similar tests of my own showed the same.
>
> About signatures: I can't find your public gpg key anywhere (to verify
> the signature), not in KEYS file nor in keyservers I
Chris,
A very limited acid test shows that I can do crawling and searching
through web app so that part is ok.
About signatures: I can't find your public gpg key anywhere (to verify
the signature), not in KEYS file nor in keyservers I checked. Am i just
blind?
The md5 format used differs from re
ris Mattmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "nutch-dev@lucene.apache.org"
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 1:43:17 AM
Subject: [VOTE] Release Apache Nutch 0.9
Hi Folks,
I have posted a candidate for the Apache Nutch 0.9 release at
http://people.apache.org/~mattmann/nutch_0.9/
See the included
Hi Folks,
I have posted a candidate for the Apache Nutch 0.9 release at
http://people.apache.org/~mattmann/nutch_0.9/
See the included CHANGES-0.9.txt file for details on release
contents and latest changes. The release was made from the 0.9-dev trunk.
Please vote on releasing these packages a
42 matches
Mail list logo
